WorstPreviews.com Logo Join the community [Login / Register]
Follow WorstPreviews.com on Twitter
What\ News Coming Soon In Theaters On DVD Trailer,Posters,Pictures,Wallpapers, Screensavers PeliBlog.com Trivia/Quizzes
News/Headlines
Trailer for "Midnight Special" Sci-Fi Film, with Michael Shannon and Joel Edgerton
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Melissa McCarthy's "The Boss" Comedy
Nov 23rd, 2015
Trailer for Juan Antonio Bayona's "A Monster Calls"
Nov 23rd, 2015
First Look at "Central Intelligence" Comedy, with Dwayne Johnson and Kevin Hart
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for "Zoolander 2" Arrives Online
Nov 19th, 2015
Official Trailer for "Now You See Me" Sequel
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Chris Hemsworth's "The Huntsman: Winter's War"
Nov 19th, 2015
Trailer for Keanu Reeves' "Exposed" Thriller
Nov 19th, 2015
First Look at Chris Pine on "Wonder Woman" Set
Nov 16th, 2015
Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel
Nov 16th, 2015
Gerard Butler is a God in "Gods of Egypt" Posters
Nov 16th, 2015
First Look at Liam Neeson in Martin Scorsese's "Silence"
Nov 16th, 2015
New Trailer for "The Divergent Series: Allegiant"
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for "Moonwalkers" Comedy, with Ron Perlman and Rupert Grint
Nov 16th, 2015
Trailer for Charlie Kaufman's "Anomalisa" Stop-Motion Film
Nov 3rd, 2015
Poster for "Warcraft" Arrives Online, Trailer Coming on Friday
Nov 3rd, 2015
There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster
Nov 2nd, 2015
First Trailer for Sacha Baron Cohen's "The Brothers Grimsby" Comedy
Nov 2nd, 2015
"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas
Nov 2nd, 2015
Final Trailer for Ron Howard's "In the Heart of the Sea," with Chris Hemsworth
Nov 2nd, 2015
New Photos From "Warcraft" Video Game Movie
Nov 2nd, 2015
Lots of New Photos From "Suicide Squad"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for "Dirty Grandpa" Comedy, with Robert De Niro and Zac Efron
Oct 30th, 2015
Sandra Bullock to Star in Female Version of "Ocean's Eleven"
Oct 30th, 2015
Trailer for Jared Hess' "Don Verdean" Comedy, with Sam Rockwell
Oct 30th, 2015
"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast
Oct 28th, 2015
Trailer for Adam Sandler's "The Ridiculous 6" Comedy
Oct 28th, 2015
"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie
Oct 28th, 2015
Another "Monopoly" Movie in the Works
Oct 28th, 2015
"Jumanji" Remake Hires "Con Air" Writer
Oct 26th, 2015
Disney's "Tower of Terror" Park Ride Movie Moving Forward
Oct 26th, 2015
Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"
Oct 26th, 2015
Previous News Stories Next News Stories

Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Movies of 2009

Posted: December 15th, 2009 by WorstPreviews.com Staff
Quentin TarantinoSubmit Comment
Quentin Tarantino takes his movie-watching very seriously and if you ask him for his favorite movies of 2009, you can bet that you'll get a well thought-out answer. The Hollywood Reporter did exactly that.

Tarantino admitted that he has yet to see "Avatar," "Lovely Bones" and "Invictus," and will not include his "Inglourious Basterds" movie. He added that he wants to rewatch a bunch of movies to see if they end up higher on the list. Two of those are "Bright Star" and "District 9," which the director apparently liked, but not enough to make them his favorites.

Check out the list below:

1. Star Trek
2. Drag Me to Hell
3. Funny People
4. Up in the Air
5. Chocolate
6. Observe and Report
7. Precious
8. An Education

Source: THR


Bookmark and Share
You must be registered to post comments. Login or Register.
Displaying 246 comment(s) Profanity: Turn On
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:16:45 PM

Well, I can say him and I do not share film tastes. ST was fun, though.
eddie499 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:27:06 PM

Funny People? Really? I must just not get that one. Snorefest City.
TheHundreds writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:30:46 PM

star trek and drag me to hell would be on my list
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:48:20 PM

What, no GI JOE?
OneTime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:48:59 PM

drag me to hell was retarded.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:49:54 PM

I wonder. If a chick French kisses him, does that count as fellatio? Because he has that Perter Griffin chin-balls look.
eddie499 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:52:03 PM

Drag Me to Hell is one of the, if not THE most underappreciated film of the year. It was mice to see Raimi doing what ge does best.
eddie499 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 6:58:11 PM

******nice. Damn phone.
Ronsauce writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:07:07 PM

Drag Me to Hell was absolutely terrible. There wasn't a single redeeming quality about it. I don't get why Observe and Report is on there as well. I wanted to like it...but I'm not sure I was just supposed to feel sad for the main character and not find any humour in it at all. Also, Anna Faris is a f*cking joke.
Tyrkae writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:07:36 PM

Ya for sure Drag me to hell that movie has been on of the top 10 best movies of this year and yes VERY underappreciated cant wait for the next Evil dead and Sparticus
chiefone writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:15:22 PM

the only movie i've seen on that list is ST, I'll take the time to watch Up in the Air sometime , not interested in watching the rest
Chrisfloyd writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:16:33 PM

Mink -

Well, I can say him and I do not share film tastes. ST was fun, though.

...........................

What are your favourite 8 films of 2009? Please. Just curious.


minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:18:49 PM

Well, thanks for ruining Drag Me to Hell. Is it really that bad? I haven't seen it. Was planning on watching it later.

Ok, so what movies have you wonderful people seen that are just absolutely badass? f*ck Tarantino for a moment (go away Vindy) and just think about you like. Not even 2009 films only, but of all films.

What films do YOU consider to be the best, and why?
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:26:36 PM

"What are your favourite 8 films of 2009? Please. Just curious."

I can't think of ten films I've seen this year that were worth a damn. Maybe, maybe five.

And I kind of liked Law Abiding Citizen. Incredible far-fetched and had a terrible ending, but it was nice once again to see someone getting proactive.

Star Trek was ok. Fun film , bad ST movie. Roddenberry is probably rolling around in his grave.

IMO, it was an awful year for mainstream films.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:27:20 PM

Oh, you said 8, not ten. Still about four too many for me.
Jedimax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:29:13 PM

I am surprised Anti-Christ is not on the list.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:31:47 PM

Maybe The Hurt Locker, Star Trek, Up, and Mega Shark Versus Giant Octopus.
Chrisfloyd writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:34:53 PM

Cool. Mink, The Hurt Locker was fantastic. Did you see Moon? I thought that was a great film. I cant believe Rockwell is being overlooked by Globes. He was brilliant.
wonderBOY writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:39:41 PM

mine goes star trek, basterds, watchmen, fanboys and drag me to hell not in order
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:40:28 PM

I hear the Hangover was hilarious. Still haven't seen it. District 9 was well made. Not my kind of thing, I like slick polished sci-fi. Haven't seen The Men Who Stare at Goats either.

has anyone seen Triangle yet?
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:41:56 PM

I was joking about Mega Shark Versus Giant Octopus. lol. No, I haven't see Moon yet. Lemme look it up and see if its my kind of thing.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:44:39 PM

Chocolate... interesting.
I bet he thought, "Now THAT'S how Uma Thurman should fight!"
If I was a betting man, I'd bet he's got JeeJa Yanin in mind for some future project, like... oh, I don't know... Kill Bill 3!

But it feels like something is missing in that list. I must conclude Tarantino doesn't watch porn.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:46:50 PM

f*ck the Golden Globes. Bunch of hypocrites at a popularity contest.
Ranger writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 7:52:15 PM




'Quentin Tarantino's Favorite Movies of 2009'


Who gives a sh*t?


c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:03:20 PM

"f*ck the Golden Globes. Bunch of hypocrites at a popularity contest."

Basically, yes. Still, I can't help but watch anyway. I like seeing awards shows for some reason. It's an irrepressible habit of mine. I find it's always nice to see the one in fifteen occurrences when someone who actually DESERVES recognition walks away with it. (Here's to you, Daniel Day-Lewis.)

I would give "Drag Me to Hell" a chance, minkowski. It's absolute cheese but it's deliberate which makes it work, I think. People pretty much know what to expect from Sam Raimi's horror fare, so you should be pretty aware of what you'll be getting yourself into, more or less. And "The Hangover" was absolute bliss.
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:13:12 PM

It warms my heart to know that I wasn't the only man in America that loved "Observe and Report". I swear, that ending was one of the biggest payoffs I have ever witnessed in film history. Ha ha.

I will, of course, be skipping "Precious" though. It just looks like another sappy urban melodrama, a shallow and ingratiating attempt to pull at your heartstrings. Sure, Mo-Nique's performance in it might, for all I know, be a tour-de-force, but we all know that she's gonna go right back to doing the same ol' repetitive, asinine, stereotype-saturated song-and-dance she's done her entire f*cking career. Plus, I just f*cking despise Tyler Perry.

500 pounds, raped by dad, and pregnant with her SECOND child?! Jesus, who in their right mind would mount that cow!!!
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:20:53 PM

Does everybody want to know Triggax's favorite movies of 2009?... I can safely say that 3 count em' 3 vengeance flicks made it into the top 3...

1. Gran Torino.. Hands down best film of the year.. no sh*t... and it was 2009.. just way back in january is all..
2. Harry f*cking Brown.. Michael Caine is THE most bad ass mother f*ck that ever lived.
3. Law Abiding Citizen. Gerard Butler gave me a broner in this one.
4. I Love You, Man. Say what you want, i f*cking loved that movie.
5. The Cove... f*ckA YOURA DOLPHEENERA!!
6. Crazy Heart.. Man what a spectacular f*cking movie.. my god Bridges is gonna take that gold home no doubt..
7. The Hurt Locker.. The undeniable best picture winner for the year..
and 8.. I haven't seen it yet, but i can tell you already that it will be avatar..

I hope you all read this and take something away from it.. you f*cking little homo bitches.. werd!!

Oh and... Ron Sauce, the reason Observe and Report is on that list, is because it's a guys list that isn't you or anybody else that didn't like the movie.. thats probably why.. its not like Tarantinos official hollywood award list.. like he hands out giant awards that look like chins. Its just his opinion.. some people liked it some people didn't.. thats why.. what the f*ck...

Mink... Watch Moon.. You'd like it.. its a thinking mans sci fi.. not all in your face like most are these days.. well thought out story.. with f*cking sam rockwell acting against himself.. whats better than having 1 Sam Rockwell in a film..? 2 Sam Rockwells..
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:23:16 PM

"500 pounds, raped by dad, and pregnant with her SECOND child?! Jesus, who in their right mind would mount that cow!!!"

- Dandy! Remember when he came on here saying he now doesn't post as much, because he got a girlfriend? Well, there you go.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:25:23 PM

"It warms my heart to know that I wasn't the only man in America that loved "Observe and Report". I swear, that ending was one of the biggest payoffs I have ever witnessed in film history. Ha ha."

@cprime.. Im with you.. the ending would have been worth it even if it was a crappy film, which it wasn't... you just gotta get jody hill you know... I f*cking loved The Foot Fist Way i f*cking loved Eastbound and Down... I f*cking loved Observe and Report... And yes my god what a fantastic ending... just f*cking shoots him... best line in the entire film had to have been. "Why the f*ck would I want to blow up the Chick-fil-A? It's f*cking delicious!"
coldplayesence writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:29:39 PM

I'm suprised that he didn't put Drag Me To Hell at the top, it's the kind of movie he's always talking about, cheesey but awesome. I still need to see Avatar, then I'll pick my favorite but so far Inglourious Basterds FTW!
coldplayesence writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:32:31 PM

@triggax: I think Gran Torino came out in 2008, not sure.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:33:53 PM

Trig: Loved both Gran Torino and LAC. Haven't seen Harry Brown.

Anyway, I've got a little list of what to watch.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:34:35 PM

Gran Torino came out in late 2008, I think.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:43:59 PM

Alright, if we're splitting hairs... Its limited theatrical run started december 12, 08.. it expanded into wide release January 9th 2009... So i mean... Its on the cusp...

And Mink... Scratch everything off your list until you see Harry Brown.. f*cking spectacular... oh man...
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:44:58 PM

The Gran Torino came out in 1968 and was produced until 76. (I know, lame... but I couldn't resist)
murphyslaw93 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:53:08 PM

@triggax: nothing against you dude, but Gran Torino was one of the worst films of...either year, 2008 or 2009. I like Eastwood but man did that movie suck. Terrible acting, boring premise, cliched ending, Eastwood's done much better he really disappointed with this one. Your other picks are cool, but i dont understand how people found Gran Torino any good.

And thanks for sharing Tarantino, Star Trek was awesome, and him acknowledging Drag Me to Hell makes me happy, that movie is friggen great, and just to reiterate, highly highly underappreciated
Osiris3eagle writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 8:58:01 PM

There's a legit torrent of Harry Brown on ThePirateBay.org ,it's pretty good
My favorites of 09
Moon
Inglourious Basterds
District 9
500 Days of Summer
Watchmen
The Hurt Locker
The Road
Bad Lieutenant: Port of Call New Orleans
The Brothers Bloom

I'm sure Up in the Air will be in my top 10 after I see it this weekend...hate me if you will, but I think Avatar will be as well.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:04:28 PM

"@triggax: nothing against you dude, but Gran Torino was one of the worst films of...either year, 2008 or 2009."

Thats fine... Don't care much for other peoples opinions.. so I dont care if people care for mine... But i will say that i would rather watch Clint Eastwood take a sh*t and read the horse whisperer for 2 hours than watch most of the garbage thats out there these days... ...as far as Gran torino having no premise.. you must have missed something.. its an excellent social commentary as far as stereo typing communities is concerned... but like i said.. don't care..
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:05:29 PM

Sorry didn't read your post properly.. you didn't accuse it of having no premise..
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:16:24 PM

"Terrible acting"

Eastwood used ACTUAL H'Mong people. Look them up. Acting quality was sacrificed SPECIFICALLY to portray the H'Mong people BY H'Mong people. So it's clear you did not understand why the acting wasn't as polished.

"boring premise"

So sorry it didn't have a car explosion ever five seconds, tits and laser blasts. You must find life pretty boring too. You sound like one of those guys just bored by living so you spend all your time on XBox live. Hate to tell ya kid, life is about the relationships between people and peoples. If you find relating to other people, without explosions, guns and knife fights, 'boring' then you are REALLY going to hate growing old.

The point? Gran Torino is about life and about death. About growing old. About changing. About seeing things differently. And about making friends in the least likely places. And I am so f*cking sorry you missed that.
"cliched ending"

A cliched ending would have been him wiping out the little thugs. Now THAT would've been a cliched ending. I mean, what other ways are their for the conflict to get resolved? A Michael Flatley 'Lord of the Dance' number? Huh? Did you even watch the movie?
Osiris3eagle writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:21:29 PM

He's 16, you really expect him to like a drama like Gran Torino? He probably spent the day watching GI Joe, playing CoD: MW2, and jerking off to internet porn....10 times
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:33:20 PM

"He probably spent the day watching GI Joe, playing CoD: MW2, and jerking off to internet porn....10 times"

- Sounds like the kid had a great day, then!
tcu21 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 9:38:37 PM

Decent list, but my favorites were:

Inglourious Basterds
I Love You, Man
Star Trek
Drag Me to Hell
The Hangover
District 9

No particular order except for Inglourious Basterds being the best film of the year in my opinion. But I still have to see Up in the Air and The Hurt Locker to make a fully educated claim.

@trigax: Thank you for naming I Love You, Man. Sooo underrated I will officially watch anything with Jason Segel

@mink: True that Gran Torino did come out in late 2008, but it was so snubbed by the Globes and Academy that it deserves to be on the best of 2009.

@murphy: The only negative thing you can say about Gran Torino is that it wasn't Eastwood's best film. That movie was fantastic and it certainly makes me hope that will not be Eastwood's last acting credit.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:10:46 PM

haha yeah Segels my f*cking hero...

"That guys crop dusting all over your open house..."


bacci40 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:16:28 PM

drag me to hell was fun...but not in my top ten...
TheStig writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:25:40 PM

I Love You Man was hilarious...and I was a little undecided about Gran Torino...I love Eastwood's films normally, but was disaapointed in Changeling and Million Dollar Baby and GT was definitely an improvement over those IMO.


TheStig writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:29:30 PM

and ST was a ton of fun...pretty big praise coming from a huge Star Wars fanboy like myself...
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:30:31 PM

I Love everything Eastwood directs.. I have yet to see a film that he's done that I don't love.. With that said, he still to this date has not made a film better than "A Perfect World" Midnight In the Garden comes close, as well as Mystic River and GT... But still to this day.. nothing compares... Keep in mind he did Unforgiven prior to A Perfect World.. Otherwise id say Unforgiven.. Which IMO is his best film.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:31:27 PM

That's because basically it *was* Star Wars.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:33:53 PM

@Sac, It didn't crack mine either, yet If I was asked which were my top ten horror films of the year... It would be a short f*cking list, consisting of Drag Me to Hell... and Doghouse... thats it... oh and Halloween 2... haha just kidding.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:34:26 PM

The following is the definitive list of the best movies of 2009 (so far) as deemed by very important people qualified to be making such judgments. The following list is not simply the opinion of one critic/journalist/director, or even several, but the objective truth.

1. Hurt Locker
2. Inglorious Basterds
3. Up
4. District 9
5. Star Trek
6. Hangover
7. Fantastic Mr. Fox
8. Zombieland
9. Drag me to Hell
10.Bad Lieutenant

If you disagree with any aspect of the list, it simply means that you are wrong in regards to that particular aspect. You might be forgiven if your point of contention is the omission of a little movie called Moon. You might also be forgiven if your point of contention is the inclusion of some movie in the list that takes the place of A Prophet, which in your opinion belongs in the list in the stead of your least favorite pick of the above top 10. Most of us haven't seen it yet. You will not, however, be forgiven if the point of contention regards the Eastwood film Gran Torino. Disregard the fact many might consider the movie "sooo last year." The movie is weak. The utter disdain these Objective Makers of Definitive Lists (OMDL) hold for Lovers of Gran Torino might stem from the hope that they had for the movie, based on the people involved (Eastwood) and the potential for greatness suggested by the interesting premise and script, hopes that were crushed by the mediocrity of the end product and the dust of What Could Have Been. Whatever goodness it possesses is tainted by the greatness that should have been there instead. It is guilty of the same sins as the last three Star Wars movies, the last two Matrix movies, and that one movie where Jackie Chan and Jet Li finally starred together in the same movie. To a lesser degree than the aforementioned examples, but of the same ilk nonetheless. And authentic H'mong-ism necessarily maketh a good actor not.

The OMDL predicts with 95.3% certainty that Avatar will replace one of the above movies, with a place near the very top. This is based on rigorous statistical analysis of various, highly relevant input data, including such factors as Cameron's reliability in output quality (The Abyss, Aliens, Terminators, hell, even True Lies), Cameron's status as the man who made the biggest moneymaking movie machine of all time (unadjusted for inflation), and the fact of the labor of love that has been Avatar and the bazillions of dollars spent in its creation, and the generally positive reactions of those fortunate enough to have seen the film already. Color OMDL jealous. OMDL also predicts Nolan's Inception is going to kick a$$. This is based on nothing. Absolutely nothing at all.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:43:34 PM

You talk the talk friendo but you completely Tarded yourself by putting Zombieland on your list... Albeit.. A fine film Indeed... doesn't belong on that list.. nor does The Fantastic Mr Fox... Don't mistake Wes Andersons charming quirkiness for a good film... it was boring and pretentious.. He hasn't made a truly phenomenal film since the tenenbaums.. and Mr Fox suffers from the exact same Anderson created cliches that Aquatic and Darjeeling suffered from..

Your list is extremely adolescent, so its hard to take you seriously, though you articulate yourself quite well.
triggax writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:44:51 PM

Bad Lieutenant was flipping radtastic though ill give you that...
Kindlegolas writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:52:36 PM

What about The hangover?
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:52:45 PM

"If you disagree with any aspect of the list, it simply means that you are wrong in regards to that particular aspect."

...according to the OMDL that is. Anyway, I think you're mad at the OMDL because they bashed your movie Gran Torino. I believe they wanted to like, based on their post. Anyway, any criticisms regarding "tarding" of lists and juvenility are rendered null when it comes from the mouth of one whose own list includes Law Abiding Citizen. Hope that is some kind of joke.
takai writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:53:07 PM

Really Tarantino? Chocolate > Ong Bak 2? I'm not sure what you judged that from.
warriors187 writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:54:48 PM

I saw Drag Me To Hell opening day. I sat in the very back of the theatre and drank two 24oz Steele Reserves. I love that movie
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:59:35 PM

@ Triggax: That's good to hear, man. I was beginning to think I was one of the only people who appreciated "Observe and Report", though I showed it to my friends two weeks ago and they were roaring with laughs. I haven't seen "The Foot Fist Way" yet, but I bought "Eastbound & Down" on DVD a few months back and I plan on watching it tonight. I hope it's great.

As for "Harry Brown", a friend of mine downloaded it online recently and told me it was even better than "Gran Torino", which took me by surprise. With all this good feedback, I am eagerly waiting for it to hit theaters.

I felt differently about "Fantastic Mr. Fox" though, man. I laughed though every minute of that thing. I'm not exaggerating - EVERY SINGLE MINUTE. To me, it's as good as any of his live action movies (and probably better than some of them). Every year, I've found myself backing up Pixar's monopoly on the "Best Animated Film" Oscar, but this is actually one year when I wouldn't mind seeing it go to another movie (and I loved the hell out of "Up").
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 10:59:47 PM

Articulate? The idiot makes no sense! He or he is too busy rattling off tortured sentences to say simply what he or she means.
Articulation is the ability to express yourself clearly and concisely, and it is not a long string of sophomoric pretentious gobbledygook that leaves many a reader wondering just what the f*ck is being communicated.
Kurskij writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:01:57 PM

Strange, no Watchmen. Seemed lke his kind of movie to me. No District 9?! No 9, no Ninja Assassin. And at thesame time And Education and Up in the Air? Quentin is getting sentimental with age...
Kurskij writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:02:31 PM

f*ck my morning spelling...
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:05:14 PM

Tortured, yes. Not so sure about, "makes no sense." Most of it makes perfect sense. In an oh-so-tortured way, yes, but the meaning of what is being said should be clear to anyone who doesn't have sh*t for brains. Most of it. The pretentious gobbledygook is part of the joke? C'mon now...
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:12:21 PM

Just say what you mean to say moron and try not confuse and gunk it up with pretentious crap. The art of articulation is employing the most effective method in conveying your ideas to the widest audience. So you're shooting yourself in the foot and the d*ck here with sentences that mean next to nothing.

And...I'd say you're dandy, but he's too gay to like Avatar.
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:12:48 PM

There's certainly been a lot of talk about "Law Abiding Citizen" on this thread. I admit, it was entertaining. Basically, it was "Saw" with better actors (which is, frankly, all you need). The one thing that kept me from fully enjoying it, however, was how the movie framed Jamie Foxx as the good guy, as a symbol of morals and rationality to Gerard Butler's supposed diabolical inhumanity. Maybe it just depends on the viewer's conceptualization of "justice" - I don't know. But I can say that if similar incidents akin to the ones Gerard experienced in the film happened to me, well, I can tell you I'd have a stockpile a bloody O.J. gloves at my house. And it'd happen a lot sooner than ten years, that's for damn sure.

Anyway though, that's just a minor complaint. The movie wouldn't make my "best of" list, but it was still an entertaining little jolt of autumn escapism.
polardeficit writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:14:35 PM

i dont get how so many of you are commentingn on a film website when you apparently barely see any movies
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:19:01 PM

@ polardeficit:

"when you apparently barely see any movies"

CAN YOU f*ckING READ???

Practically everybody here so far gave detailed reasons why they liked, and disliked, the movies they are commenting on!
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:21:19 PM

"Sentences that mean nothing."

See, when you say something like that, the message that I'm getting is that you're just too dumb to understand a slightly convoluted sentence. And then you suggest to speak in a clearer fashion, when the convolution is half the point. If you had said instead, "There were one or two spots in which your points got muddled amidst all that excessive elocution, and overall the writing seemed a little convoluted," or something along those lines, then I might be a little more inclined to listen, as it sounds like something coming out of the mouth of a sensible person. Rather than a clueless idiot. See, I can use that word too? Which is what you sound like right now. Something is beyond your comprehension and you resort to the juvenile tactic of calling people names. Two can play that game.
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:24:10 PM

Oh, man, this is gonna be good...
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:24:29 PM

"The following is the definitive list of the best movies of 2009 (so far) as deemed by very important people qualified to be making such judgments."

Because we all know 'very important people' are always right and what they say is the absolute truth and the last word on the matter, right?



"The following list is not simply the opinion of one critic/journalist/director, or even several, but the objective truth."

There is no objective truth in art. That's why it's called art and not science.


"If you disagree with any aspect of the list, it simply means that you are wrong in regards to that particular aspect."

So, if I disagree with a 'particular aspect', then I'm wrong on that 'particular aspect'? Why not just say, "I am right, you are wrong, go f*ck yourself"? Why dress it up in pretention and sophmoric articulation?


"You might be forgiven if your point of contention is the omission of a little movie called Moon."

you might be forgiven for f*cking the English language in the *sshole and calling it sex.



"You might also be forgiven if your point of contention is the inclusion of some movie in the list that takes the place of A Prophet,"

What?



"which in your opinion belongs in the list in the stead of your least favorite pick of the above top 10."

OMG, STFU. Hows that for articulation?



"Most of us haven't seen it yet."

Seen what yet? Moon, A Prophet? Your ability to express an idea in less words than a paragraph of Finnegan's Wake?



"You will not, however, be forgiven if the point of contention regards the Eastwood film Gran Torino. Disregard the fact many might consider the movie "sooo last year." The movie is weak."

So says you, a person lacking an inherent ability to not look like an idiot with a overblown penchant for rambling and contorted sentences.



"The utter disdain these Objective Makers of Definitive Lists (OMDL) hold for Lovers of Gran Torino might stem from the hope that they had for the movie, based on the people involved (Eastwood) and the potential for greatness suggested by the interesting premise and script, hopes that were crushed by the mediocrity of the end product and the dust of What Could Have Been."

In other words, they were 'disappointed'. See, that's the power of a dictionary.



"Whatever goodness it possesses is tainted by the greatness that should have been there instead."

So, it's worse because it's not good enough? Wow, that's some seriously circular thinking. The sky's blue because it's not very red, purple, green or orange.



"It is guilty of the same sins as the last three Star Wars movies, the last two Matrix movies, and that one movie where Jackie Chan and Jet Li finally starred together in the same movie."

You're comparing a simple Eastwood movie to oeverhyped sci-fi flicks with massive budgets. You're comparison is more than just a little specious, dipsh*t.



"To a lesser degree than the aforementioned examples, but of the same ilk nonetheless."

Same ilk, huh? So, by ilk you mean level of disappointment, right? Not sure Gran Torino had remotely the same anticipation of the Matrix sequels or the Star Wars prequels, but hey, this is you're mental fart, so I'll play along.



"And authentic H'mong-ism necessarily maketh a good actor not."

Well, that's good, because no one said it did. Ever. So you might want to brush up n the readin and comprehension whilst you fiddle away on that new dictionary.



"The OMDL predicts with 95.3% certainty that Avatar will replace one of the above movies,"

Well hell, a bunch of people predict that a film that cost 300 million will replace at the very least Bad Lieutenant! Well f*ck me! Who they predict to win the 2010 Super Bowl? Because I want to place bets now, damnit. I mean, with prognostication skills like that, Nostradamus would be envious. Even better, my d*ck predicts Avatar won't make sh*t from me. How about that?



"with a place near the very top."

No, I suggest near the bottom. Like at number 50. Because cameron films with all this buzz and all the years of work and all the fans and all the money always hit near the bottom.



"This is based on rigorous statistical analysis of various, highly relevant input data, including such factors as Cameron's reliability in output quality (The Abyss, Aliens, Terminators, hell, even True Lies),"

Right, like you can feed into 'statistical analysis' the fact that Cameron's films do well at the box office. Any fool can look at Boxoffice mojo to see that! What's next? Algebraic ring theory getting used to predict an Uwe Boll film will tank?



"Cameron's status as the man who made the biggest moneymaking movie machine of all time (unadjusted for inflation),"

Duurrrrrrr. And I sh*t my biggest sh*t just yesterday. An all time large sh*t. Must mean I'll have an even larger all-time sh*t tomorrow.



"and the fact of the labor of love that has been Avatar and the bazillions of dollars spent in its creation,"

Because we all know 'bazillions' of dollars and labors of love always translate into massive successes. I mean, it's f*cking scientific right? Like the success of the Third Reich and communism. And the last three Star Wars films. And the Matrix sequels.



"and the generally positive reactions of those fortunate enough to have seen the film already."

And that means what? That I'll like it too? Just because it cost 'bazillions', Cameron loves it and critics are generally impressed?



"Color OMDL jealous. OMDL also predicts Nolan's Inception is going to kick a$$. This is based on nothing. Absolutely nothing at all."

Because you're an idiot tying up bandwidth with stupidity.
Barney Stinson writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:30:09 PM

@Mink - I saw Triangle a couple of days ago. What'd you think of it?
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:31:58 PM

Ha ha ha! I knew it was gonna be good! I f*cking knew it! Jesus, minkowski! Ha ha!
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:33:16 PM

"See, when you say something like that, the message that I'm getting is that you're just too dumb to understand a slightly convoluted sentence."

No, I understood you're claptrap of a post. I had to run it through my *sshole bullsh*t decoder first, but I got the jist. You spent 5000 word sfor what could've been said in 50, and that's just stupidity wearing the clothing of false intelligence.


"And then you suggest to speak in a clearer fashion"

I asked you to start simple what's on your pedestrian mind.

"when the convolution is half the point."

No, the convolution is the entire point when you're alienatiing your audience with garbage in an attempt to look intelligent but instead coming off like a fool with a psychology degree. That's the point.


"If you had said"

If I had said eat sh*t and die, that would've been more concise on my part, yes.

"instead, "There were one or two spots in which your points got muddled amidst all that excessive elocution, and overall the writing seemed a little convoluted,"


Why would I say that when I could simply say you're amoron with a proclivity for profuse predilection to pretetiousness?


"or something along those lines, then I might be a little more inclined to listen,"

Now why would I want to talk to like you? I'm smarter, more evolved and more effecient than that. I'm a quick little mammal, you're a lumbering dinosaur.



"as it sounds like something coming out of the mouth of a sensible person."

Ok, now I know you;re joking with me. Nothing sensible in chewing bandwidth with several paragraphs of rubbish that no on wants to hear but your psych professor you ass f*cked in your sophmore year.


"Rather than a clueless idiot."

So says the guy that cannot express himself clearly.


"See, I can use that word too?"

can you use this one? Pretentious. Or this one? Twat?


"Which is what you sound like right now."

yes, you certainly sound like a pretentious twat. Thanks for admitting that.


"Something is beyond your comprehension and you resort to the juvenile tactic of calling people names. Two can play that game."

Well f*ck me, you can use cliches too. Aren't you a clever little beaver.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:39:05 PM

"@Mink - I saw Triangle a couple of days ago. What'd you think of it?"

I was trying to watch it, until d*ckstrangler rolled on in on his parade of pompous pride. Hey, do you like my alliteration, you balloon of monkey j*zz?

I'll let you know when I finish. So far, I like it, unlike TwittyBitty's inane and intensely irresponsible irrelevance.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:39:49 PM

Hahaha. Hey man, glad you took the time to write all that. What had earlier merely been a suspicion has been now confirmed as fact. YOU ARE CLUELESS. You missed the entire point. This one especially cracks me up, where you write, "There is no objective truth in art. That's why it's called art and not science."

So this is the quote you're responding to:
"The following list is not simply the opinion of one critic/journalist/director, or even several, but the objective truth."

Um, yea. That's the joke dumbsh*t. You're misinterpreting the entire tone of the thing. It's kinda cute, actually. Like arguing with a 3rd grader, gotta spell things out for them.

minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:41:49 PM

Take your bleeding ass with you when you hit the door, dumbass. No one wants to mop up your anal hemorrhage. Not even dandy.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:43:31 PM

Wait, three can play that game, I want in!

@ Nitty:

Your worshiped "Objective Makers of Definitive Lists" don't apply here.

You're trying to use a form of evaluating the merits of movies applying rigid criteria. Well, guess what, you can't put movies in test tubes and examine them in a process similar to breaking down molecules.

Cinema, being a form of art, cannot be subjected to that type of analysis.

Your argument falls flat from its inception.

Wait, I'll make my point shorter and elucidative:

All you rambling and verbal diarrhea amounts to nothing.

Wait, even shorter, you're a moron.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:45:39 PM

Next time, bud, when you want to tell a 'joke', make sure you're funny first, ok? Make sure the 'joke' is worth anyone's time. Playing village idiot only makes other idiots laugh.

And I enjoyed replying. I feel more awake and invigorated now than I have all day. So, thanks.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:49:34 PM

Peter Parker, you're missing something. He now claims to have been joking! Even though his post is nothing more than a Sargasso Sea of slop, and his post possesses deadpan earnestness, it was all a misunderstood joke. Admittedly a terribly unfunny, indefinite and sloppily written joke, but we should praise him for his methodical and rigorous spoof of...whatever he was supposedly spoofing. That's the genius of this guy's stupidity.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:50:14 PM

Hey Peter Parker! Another moron joins in the fun. Who, just like minkowski, completely and utterly misses the point. How thickheaded can you be? Ojective Makers of Definitive Lists? ODML? C'mon, how can you take that crap seriously? How can you make a definitive list of something that is inherently subjective? It was funny when minkowski walked in and did it. Two idiots in the same room, that's not funny, that's a tragedy.
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:51:51 PM

"All you rambling and verbal diarrhea amounts to nothing."

Exactly. Even if you view his post as some ludicrous form of cynical comedy, it fails. It simply is not effective. It lacks humor. It lacks precision. It lacks efficiency. It lacks purpose. Just like this f*cker's brain.
c-prime writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:52:02 PM

"Dandy! Remember when he came on here saying he now doesn't post as much, because he got a girlfriend? Well, there you go."

Ha ha. Man, Peter, you all really loathe that guy. I wasn't around that day when you all barraged him with insults at his gayness, but I wish I had been. It'd be fun to be able to be part of the joke.

I'm still not over the bitch in "Precious" getting knocked up twice. I mean, how could you find a hole underneath all those gelatinous folds?! Plus, I thought bestiality was outlawed in the United States!
minkowski writes:
on December 15th, 2009 at 11:58:44 PM

"Hey Peter Parker! Another moron joins in the fun."

You invented a third personality?

"Who, just like minkowski, completely and utterly misses the point.'

Yeah, I'm sorry for not gettin gyou eshaustingly idiotic 'joke' Forgive me. I don't usually sit around waiting for morons to play text-only practical jokes.

"How thickheaded can you be?"

no more d*ckheaded than you.

"Ojective Makers of Definitive Lists? ODML?"

So you have no existence beyond contriving usless acronyms? You must be a hit with the men.

C'mon, how can you take that crap seriously? How can you make a definitive list of something that is inherently subjective?

So that's your joke?! And what, you want a gold star and a cookie for that? And now that you've amused yourself, isn't bed time?

"It was funny when minkowski walked in and did it."

Well aren't you a clever f*ck. I bet you egg people's houses and spray paint cars. You devise a seriously worded text-only post that is riddled with inane claptrap, professing your views with dire earnestm and then because we don't get your lame attempt at 'humor' we're the morons? I think the moron is the guy that sets misleading traps. I mean, what no animals to torture today? Or are you just some low-ego narccicist in eed of a self-esteem boost?


"Two idiots in the same room, that's not funny, that's a tragedy."

I'll say. You and you're mother should stop sharing the same bed.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:00:42 AM

You're right. It wasn't nearly as funny as your serious interpretation and responses. Not that it was meant to be funny. The tone just wasn't serious. I'm still cracking up.

"To a lesser degree than the aforementioned examples, but of the same ilk nonetheless."

Same ilk, huh? So, by ilk you mean level of disappointment, right? Not sure Gran Torino had remotely the same anticipation of the Matrix sequels or the Star Wars prequels, but hey, this is you're mental fart, so I'll play along.

--Um..See that's just idiocy. That's what "of the same ilk, to a lesser degree" means. That they're categorically the same...but differ in DEGREE. It's not that hard dude...

You want responses to each one of your responses? If you're gonna keep up with the insults, I can go all day. You've provided enough fodder showing off your idiocy to fill the pages of a book.

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:02:15 AM

...must...proofread...I wonder if I can bribe dandy into blowing Alex, just so we can get an edit button...


On the other hand, I'm glad the little tart was just 'joking'. It gives me a slim hope he might develop some semblance of a useful existence one day. Not as a comedian though.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:07:07 AM

"--Um..See that's just idiocy. That's what "of the same ilk, to a lesser degree" means. That they're categorically the same...but differ in DEGREE. It's not that hard dude..."

What your saying, genius, is that Earth is the same ilk as the star Betelgeuse, just to lesser degree. Now, does that make sense, moron? Or...a bench ball and a round sand pebble are of the same ilk, just to lesser degree. Makes no sense, which is why I upbraided your studied stupidity.

I mean, just because you postulate nonsense doesn't mean I have to observe and follow your rules. Gran Torino isn't in the same galaxy as Matrix Revolutions, much less the same solar system. Yeah, their of the same ilk, both are movies, but you're comparison by the term ilk breaks down entirely thereafter, rendering it utterly idiotically useless.

So learn to think dipsh*t instead of running your mouth. Save that hole for your father.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:07:09 AM

Naw, minkowski, you're just mad because you know you looked stupid up there with all the uber-serious responses that shed light on the degree to which you failed at reading comprehension. Now, you can turn the tables and bitch and moan about how I "tricked" you into making those uber-serious-completely-miss-the-point responses and how that speaks for my character and egg-throwing ways (blah blah), but you're just lashing out at this point. Trying to redeem some cred. Trying to look a little less foolish. I don't know what exactly it was that caused you to lash out with all this juvenile vitriol, but maybe you should go see a therapist or something. Because nothing I said really warranted that kind of bitterness. At first it was funny. Now it's just pathetic. Relax man. You started with the name calling, so I tossed some back your way, just to play along, but now you're doing the 3rd grader tantrum lashing out thing. And I'm just going to have to walk away from the playground until you learn to banter without crying about it.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:07:27 AM

"Another moron joins in the fun"

- I personally find it difficult to say no to a good threesome. Right now, I'm imagining you having some very heavy mammary glands (tits for you, Doctor), and a very round and gapped ass, since mink is raping you to the skull.

Picture me as the dude who's jerking off the obvious anal violation that you are being the victim of.
Wait, I'll go slower and drop the analogy: I'm having fun watching you getting owned.

You can picture me as the d*ck on your other end, your mouth.

"C'mon, how can you take that crap seriously? How can you make a definitive list of something that is inherently subjective?"

- No. That was you trying to be somewhat funny, miserably failing at that, and using some cowardly bullsh*t you made up to justify your taste in movies.

Here's how you could have done it, avoiding the ass-whooping you're deservedly getting:

"This is the list of movies I like. For the ones who don't like it, f*ck you."

And there, everybody here respects a man that stands up for his beliefs/taste/sexual preference.

You? You're backing up now like a bitch who just lost direction.
You also lost your arrogant tone, which makes you even more incoherent.

"Two idiots in the same room, that's not funny, that's a tragedy"

- No, your verbal diarrhea converted into the vulgarity you replaced it with is a tragedy. Again, incoherent.
Two people agreeing you are a moron is plain common sense, which you lack completely.

Please, continue making attempts at defending your ridiculous previous posts. I enjoy this.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:07:39 AM

"You want responses to each one of your responses? If you're gonna keep up with the insults, I can go all day. You've provided enough fodder showing off your idiocy to fill the pages of a book."

Then get on with it bitch.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:10:21 AM

All we need now is Ranger. The Unholy Trinity. lol. Good f*cking job PP. You fail to fail.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:12:17 AM

What a whining, pretentious loser. He failed to pass muster with his sh*t stain post and now he's backing that ass up faster than dandy on date night.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:15:09 AM

Yeah, where the f*ck IS Ranger?
He'd love to get a hold of this bitchy c*nt.
Can somebody page his ass?

Hey Nitty... I have something here for you...
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:15:58 AM

If you can't think of one example in which two things are in the same category, but have differences in value or degree...then why am I even bothering with attempting communication? Does that really need further elaboration?

Gran Torino was a movie the OMDL initially had hopes for, but it turned out to be disappointment. Just like in the example with the Matrix and Star Wars. BUT TO A LESSER DEGREE. It's not rocket science.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:19:05 AM

"You also lost your arrogant tone, which makes you even more incoherent."

Naw, I'm just trying to keep my sentences really, really simple for fear of losing the two of you for a 2nd time. Don't wanna say anything that might be failed to be comprehended, since that seems to be so easy to do, ya know? See, simple sentences.


Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:20:33 AM

"If you can't think of one example in which two things are in the same category, but have differences in value or degree"

- That one is easy, you and Dandy.

triggax writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:21:50 AM

Hows this for an intelligent response Nittygritty.. You're f*cking retarded and I just had anal sex with your mother and gave your sister a hot carl and came in your dads eyes hair and mouth... It was AWESOME...!

Faggot.. Never in my f*cking life have I read anything so f*cking pompous.. What a f*cking loser... Watching you try and back pedal out of this one is as painful as watching a retarded infant attempt to climb a pole..

You're a f*cking idiot... I hope you enjoy jelly babies because your mothers gonna be farting out all over your face all f*ckin' week you f*ckin' tool..
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:22:05 AM

"Naw, I'm just trying to keep my sentences really, really simple for fear of losing the two of you for a 2nd time."

- Dude, you're not going to lose me anytime soon. I'm the one with the d*ck in your mouth, remember?
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:22:55 AM

"Your worshiped "Objective Makers of Definitive Lists" don't apply here.

You're trying to use a form of evaluating the merits of movies applying rigid criteria. Well, guess what, you can't put movies in test tubes and examine them in a process similar to breaking down molecules.

Cinema, being a form of art, cannot be subjected to that type of analysis.

Your argument falls flat from its inception."



Hahahah...still cracks me up.

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:23:58 AM

"Naw, minkowski, you're just mad"

Naw? Naw? Hillbillies and ass crackers say 'naw'. And I'm laughing my ass off.

"because you know you looked stupid"

I never look stupid because I'm not stupid, unlike you, who even when trying to look brilliant looks utterly, irredeemably f*cking stupid.


"up there with all the uber-serious responses that shed light on the degree to which you failed at reading comprehension."

Reading comprehension? There was disclaimer in your post? One that said: This looks and sounds like pretentious garbage from a bootlicking queer with a degree from ITT's school of Stupidity, but inreality it's a cleverly veiled attempt ot parady. Or did you mean to telegraph your intentions via telepathy? because, as you may not know, we can't see what youre doing on the other side of the internet.


"Now, you can turn the tables and bitch and moan about how I "tricked" you"

And yet, you claim to have posted your post just so you could trick me. That was the point of the post, by your own admission and now you claim that MY claim of trickery is somehow incorrect? Or are you just a sore loser? Like your shower room ass-raped bung hole?

"into making those uber-serious-completely-miss-the-point responses"

Like your uber-serious-completely-miss-the-point post?


"and how that speaks for my character and egg-throwing ways (blah blah),'

egg throwing and c*m gurgling. Don't forget the c*m gurgling.


"but you're just lashing out at this point."

My mentally challenged eggplant of a poster, I am having a blast over here.


"Trying to redeem some cred."

Cred? What the hell is that? something idiots like you talk about?

"Trying to look a little less foolish."

Just like the guy that posted his uber-serious-completely-miss-the-point comment, right?


"I don't know what exactly it was that caused you to lash out with all this juvenile vitriol"

your stupidity perhaps.



but maybe you should go see a therapist or something.



Maybe I can see yours Maybe she'll tell me why your inclined to get up to your knees in writhing, sweaty oily men.

"Because nothing I said really warranted that kind of bitterness."

Because you made yourself the object of derison. Imean, what's next, the bullseye is going to complain its always getting hit with bullets?

"At first it was funny."

It still is.

Now it's just pathetic.

"It was pathetic wehn you posted your uber-serious-completely-miss-the-point comment and it hasn't let up since.

"Relax man."

f*ck off, man.

"You started with the name calling,"

And I'm going to finish.


"so I tossed some back your way,"

I bet you're good at tossing, like salads.

"just to play along,"

I'm not your boy toy. Save that for the counselor.

"but now you're doing the 3rd grader tantrum lashing out thing."

"Is this any more juvenile than your original post? I think not.

"And I'm just going to have to walk away from the playground until you learn to banter without crying about it."

Loser.



Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:25:35 AM

"Hahahah...still cracks me up."

- You must enjoy being cracked, obviously, since your ass is being cracked open and you're loving it.

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:29:35 AM

It's real simple sh*t brains. A star, a planet and a beach ball are of the same ilk (CLASS, FAMILY, KIND) of the type SPHERICAL. So you know nothing of classification? Nothing of programming and logical orientation of objects with respect to share characteristics?

See, that's why you're f*cking STUPID! You have a gigantic mouth full of bullsh*t but you cannot comprehend simple ideas! That's why your life will be filled with many a nights on your knees in front of your f*cking dad.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:31:52 AM

...sahred...

This guy thinks that just because something is of the same 'ilk', they are necessarily quite similar, when in FACT things can be in the same ilk and have but perhaps one similar characteristic. Has this idiot never seen a Venn diagram? Durrrrrrr. That;s why comparison by 'ilk' is erroneous to begin with! Pretentious bleeding c*nt.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:33:06 AM

Reading comprehension? There was disclaimer in your post? One that said: This looks and sounds like pretentious garbage from a bootlicking queer with a degree from ITT's school of Stupidity, but inreality it's a cleverly veiled attempt ot parady. Or did you mean to telegraph your intentions via telepathy? because, as you may not know, we can't see what youre doing on the other side of the internet.

----Naw, it's self-evident. But then again, knowing how the internet is rife with morons, maybe a disclaimer might have been a good idea. First good one you've had all night.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:33:36 AM

ok, lemme try this again..S H A R E D. lol. f*cking firing off this knuckle busters faster than NittyGritty gets nitty gritty with the neighborhood school boys.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:35:19 AM

"----Naw, it's self-evident. But then again, knowing how the internet is rife with morons, maybe a disclaimer might have been a good idea. First good one you've had all night."

Naw, I think that's what yo ma said to yo pa the night you were conceived on a rock under the Biloxi bridge.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:36:13 AM

"First good one you've had all night."

- No, his first good one was when he called you on your obvious pretentiousness.
His second good one is still in your ass.
Mine was the third good one and you're choking on it.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:38:08 AM

That's right, you post the criminally unfunny, illiterate, rambling, deadly serious and earnest post that spends several hundred words saying absolutely NOTHING, but we're supposed to feel like morons because we failed to appreciate your clumsy attempt at being clever.

Hey, next time you want to join a group, introduce yourself. Don't trip over your own feet trying to impress strangers. It makes you look like a f*cking retard and earns no points. Yeah, dandy might want to blow you, but it won't impress the rest of us.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:38:39 AM

lol @ PP. God, WTF is Ranger!
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:38:57 AM

"This guy thinks that just because something is of the same 'ilk', they are necessarily quite similar, when in FACT things can be in the same ilk and have but perhaps one similar characteristic. Has this idiot never seen a Venn diagram? Durrrrrrr. That;s why comparison by 'ilk' is erroneous to begin with! Pretentious bleeding c*nt."

----I'm just going to copy-and-paste the original quote. I wrote:

It is guilty of the same sins as the last three Star Wars movies, the last two Matrix movies, and that one movie where Jackie Chan and Jet Li finally starred together in the same movie. To a lesser degree than the aforementioned examples, but of the same ilk nonetheless.

----Guilty of the same sins, but to a lesser degree. Less guilty. The sentence is not that hard to understand, nor did it require as much dissection as you have applied to it. It never should have come up to begin with, being self-explanatory as it is, just like the original post. It's not that difficult, kid.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:42:53 AM

Keep it up, Peter and minkowski. Ha ha. You two are giving me the best laughs I've had all day. I just don't think this guy's going to understand his miscommunication blunders.

Triggax, can I borrow that "jelly babies" retort? It was f*cking wonderful.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:43:08 AM

That changes nothing moron. As I've already said, the error is the retarded logic in your original claim, which I've discredited with my examples. Your failure to appreciate logic notwithstanding, you seem to fail at understanding even your own posts. Too busy looking like a c*nt I guess.

And, why so serious?? Why are you defending your post so diligently? Hmmmm? I mean, if it was just a spoof, a parody, a meaningless gag, a trap for the unsuspecting, WHY ARE YOU STILL DEFENDING IT? It served it's purpose, right? Why not let it go? Or perhaps you're just backtracking now that you've been called out on the rug like the dopey dimwit you are?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:44:47 AM

Thanks c-prime. I live for these kind of guys. dandy was no fun. This guy is a regular box of Tinkertoys. Unfortunately, some of them are jammed up his ass.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:44:56 AM

That's right, you post the criminally unfunny, illiterate, rambling, deadly serious and earnest post that spends several hundred words saying absolutely NOTHING, but we're supposed to feel like morons because we failed to appreciate your clumsy attempt at being clever.

-----It may have been a clumsy attempt at being clever. It may have been criminally unfunny. It probably is a tad rambling. But it's not deadly serious. And it takes a moron to think it is. And the first couple responses of you and your buddy provided some of the biggest laughs of the day. The later tantrums were cute too. So for that, I owe a small amount of thanks.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:45:04 AM

CORRECTION: "...communication blunders." That was an unintentional double negative.
triggax writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:45:24 AM

It's all yours Cprime, you can take it straight to the bank if you'd like...

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:47:32 AM

And I think dipsh*t here never understood and still doesn't understand, that the word ilk is merely a synonym for family, class and kind. Much less expecting him to understand basic object classification.

He wanted to toss it out because pretentious c*nts use those words and he's a pretentious c*nt, so he had to use it, even though he didn't understand the word, thus that's why he's a pretentious c*nt. How's THAT logic, RinkyDinky?
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:48:38 AM

Silly boy, you're not effectively defending yourself at this point.
Your initial intention of coming here to see if you could get your pecker sucked tonight failed to impress.

You're now trying to come up with something valid to say, so you won't go to bed feeling like a loser (again), but that's not gonna happen.

And, since dandy's not around, you're certainly not gonna find a boyfriend tonight.

Despite of your best intents, It's obvious by now that you're going to fall asleep lonely and feeling like a loser.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:49:07 AM

That changes nothing moron. As I've already said, the error is the retarded logic in your original claim, which I've discredited with my examples. Your failure to appreciate logic notwithstanding, you seem to fail at understanding even your own posts. Too busy looking like a c*nt I guess.

And, why so serious?? Why are you defending your post so diligently? Hmmmm? I mean, if it was just a spoof, a parody, a meaningless gag, a trap for the unsuspecting, WHY ARE YOU STILL DEFENDING IT? It served it's purpose, right? Why not let it go? Or perhaps you're just backtracking now that you've been called out on the rug like the dopey dimwit you are?

------It's still serving its purpose. You're providing entertainment.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:50:10 AM

"So for that, I owe a small amount of thanks."

- No need to thank, buddy. I speak for myself, I'm raping you for pleasure.
tcu21 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:50:20 AM

Remember when we used to talk about movies? Haha.

@GrittyNitty: I think it's time to cut your losses and move on dude. If you were actually trying to make a joke, it fell flat, let it go. If not, stop acting so pretentious and still just let it go.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:54:04 AM

"It may have been a clumsy attempt at being clever."

No may about it. It was horrible. I've seen funnier and more clever sh*t coming out of CNN's financial news network.

"It may have been criminally unfunny."

And it was. Nice for you to admit so.

"It probably is a tad rambling."


Well, Finnegans Wake has nothing on your lack of clarity, my good man.


"But it's not deadly serious."

No, but it is deadly. To the intellect. And the spirit of communication.


"And it takes a moron to think it is."

And yet, moron, you continue to defend it so seriously.


"And the first couple responses of you and your buddy provided some of the biggest laughs of the day. The later tantrums were cute too."


I'm glad my royal quartering of your presence here was amusing. Please come back for an encore. And only fags think things are 'cute' so please spare me your affections, buttercake.


"So for that, I owe a small amount of thanks."

And thanks to your father for cleaning the c*m out of your ears.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:55:40 AM

"Or perhaps you're just backtracking now that you've been called out on the rug like the dopey dimwit you are?"

- Dude, the only person here doing some sort of back activity is you.
Keep it up, though, you're doing a damn fine job at that.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:56:25 AM

lol (again) at PP. f*cking funny as hell. I think I broke a tooth laughing against the monitor.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:57:57 AM

Hey, that was me! The idiot doesn't even know to use quotations marks, PP.

Now, if we had some HTML, I could rip this guy's sphincter up to his kidneys.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:58:46 AM

"Silly boy, you're not effectively defending yourself at this point.
Your initial intention of coming here to see if you could get your pecker sucked tonight failed to impress.

You're now trying to come up with something valid to say, so you won't go to bed feeling like a loser (again), but that's not gonna happen.

And, since dandy's not around, you're certainly not gonna find a boyfriend tonight.

Despite of your best intents, It's obvious by now that you're going to fall asleep lonely and feeling like a loser."

------Naw, I came to see what Tarantino's favorite movies of 2009 were. I posted my own favorite films, instead of saying so, I took on the persona of a committee, an infallible, all-knowing can't-be-wrong committee that claims to provide its "definitive list." It takes something inherently subjective, but tosses it up as the "truth." And if you disagree, you're simply wrong. The tone is a tad pretentious, a bit academic, and the committee mentions something about "rigorous statistical studies" and whatnot about the certainty witch which Avatar is expected to enter this list. And you and your buddies take this seriously?

And you say I'm backpedaling. That I was originally dead serious and now I'm "claiming" that the tone wasn't meant to be entirely serous. So what the hell is ODML supposed to be in this "serious" scenario? Does that exist? Am I making up some acronym to give more credence to this list, to try and connive and convince you to believe that there in fact IS a "definitive list" and that if you have any contrary opinions, well, it simply means that you are wrong. You take that seriously? Well, you did. That's the scary part. When it should have been self-evident from the get go. I don't know why I bother explaining. This stopped being a rational discussion from the get-go.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:01:08 AM

@ The Nitty Gritty (or Gritty Nitty or whatever the f*ck it f*cking is): Dude, if there was any humor to be found in that post, it was lost on me. A disclaimer, or at least an asterisk, might've saved it from being a disposable, bombastic mess, but without it, your entire meaning gets lost in translation. It's that simple. We posters here at ol' WP can't perceive your muddled intentions through osmosis, and you can't lash out at us for such. This is why you are being hassled, dear boy. I'm afraid you're just gonna have to stew in your own juices on this one (pun very much intended).
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:02:26 AM

"Too busy looking like a c*nt I guess."

- Don't go confusing parts here, you're the c*nt.

"It's still serving its purpose"

- For somebody who complained about people being thick, that's actually ironic.

"You're providing entertainment."

- Again, always a pleasure ass-raping you. Feel free to drop by at any time, you can get all the entertainment you want here.
I sure love me some mindless little bitches like you.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:02:31 AM

Nice one Peter Parker with the misquote. Right in line with your character. Cute.
avaela writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:02:47 AM

Can't really order mine
Star Trek
Taken
Watchmen
District 9
The Informant
The Men Who Stare at Goats
Up in the Air
The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus
Sherlock Holmes
Observe and Report
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:05:45 AM

"I posted my own favorite films, instead of saying so, I took on the persona of a committee, an infallible, all-knowing can't-be-wrong committee that claims to provide its 'definitive list.'"

Now, if you had just posted something like that from in parenthesis or something from the beginning, none of this would have transpired. You, sir, f*cked up.

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:07:30 AM

Then why the f*ck did you go to all that trouble to make up bullsh*t acronyms and contrive a ridiculously unfunny comment!? To see if we'd blow you? To see how clover you could look!? Shy not comment on what movies you like and whether you agree with Tarantino? You j*zz jerked joke of a jackass! You were being pretentious! You assumed we could waste our time looking up your bullsh*t! You spent all that time making up sh*t, just to look like a fool, when you HOPED we'd suck you off, thinking, OMG, isn't this guy just SO f*cking clever!? I mean look at him, he;'s making up acronyms.

Look, moron, we're not going to waste our time verifying YOUR bullsh*t. We're here to have a good time not play mice to your fiddle. Get that!? Yeah, we missed the ball, we failed to note that your post was absolute bullsh*t. You got us. I mean, Like I said, we aren't going to verify everything somene says, and a lot of people here say some VERY SERIOUSLY stated nonsense, so we thought you were just another moron making an idiotically serious statement, and we dismissed you forthrightly. So don;t blame us when you misrepresented yourself, acted like a pretentious twat and failed to introduce yourself with a simple, straightforward, serious and understandable comment, especially as you are a STRANGER to us and we don;t know whether what you say is in jest or not, because you sure as hell didn't make that clear. Again we don't f*cking know you, so how the f*ck can we determine your intentions, especially when your first post is a jungle of word junk and ambiguous statements? And again I am NOT running to Google just to check your contrived bullsh*t.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:13:50 AM

"You take that seriously? Well, you did."

- It was your first post on here... ever! A disclaimer or side note would not only be wise, since nobody here has ever heard of your foolish little person, it would be the most basic common sense.

You simply cannot have any common sense whatsoever, since you fail to admit the obvious, that you were NOT funny, that you sounded like an pretentious ass, what's worst, that you're losing this one and you look like the numb guy trying to put up some fight still.

"I took on the persona of a committee, an infallible, all-knowing can't-be-wrong committee"

- And that's what you call an attempt at humor? For f*ck sakes, I could hear whispering crickets after that!!

Make a note of this: You're not funny.
But you certainly are a joke.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:14:52 AM

That's the straightest answer you've given yet. Something resembling communication. Good, now we're getting somewhere. Especially this:

"and a lot of people here say some VERY SERIOUSLY stated nonsense, so we thought you were just another moron making an idiotically serious statement, and we dismissed you forthrightly."

I mean, I STILL think that the tone speaks for itself. But this being the internet, and with the "seriously stated nonsense" floating around, I can maybe see why you might have come to the more immediate conclusion.

Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:15:22 AM

"Nice one Peter Parker with the misquote. Right in line with your character. Cute."

- No need to flatter me, dude, my d*ck is in your mouth already, remember?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:17:18 AM

I believe that SillyWilly represents the first doc*mented case of instantaneously reversed evolution.

Now, am I serious, or am I joking?
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:19:46 AM

"Good, now we're getting somewhere."

- No, wait, I didn't c*m yet!

"I mean, I STILL think that the tone speaks for itself"

- Then you're STILL a moron.

"with the "seriously stated nonsense" floating around, I can maybe see why you might have come to the more immediate conclusion"

- And it took you all that time to realize that? You can sure talk about being thick, uh?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:23:25 AM

Well, he's gone from pretentious to condescending in about one post.

I guess that's progress, right? He's basically saying: "all this miscommunication is YOUR fault, but now that you're talking in a way I can thickheadedly understand, you might have a meager point".

Never mind that all this 'miscommunication' began with HIS initial post.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:23:56 AM

Hey, Nitty, how's this for a change:

How can you tell if we were from the beggining just yanking your chain, of if that was all real criticism?

You can't!

So maybe we've just been playing you like a f*cking rag doll and had you jumping through loops to prove yourself, like the incoherent idiot you are.

Mindf*cking, uh?
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:25:53 AM

I'd interpret that as, "You are the man. You are willing to reconcile and recognize a valid point when you hear one. How awesome."

Am I being serious or am I joking?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:26:43 AM

I don't understand. Was the post a 'joke', or was it serious? Because he defends it one moment as a joke and then defends the next as if it was mean to be serious.

Or was it a serious joke from a total stranger, over the internet, in type-only form, on a movie board populated by a diversity of people? If so, how could he NOT expect it to be misconstrued? And how does his failure to appreciate the circ*mstances and the milieu of his very first post make US f*cking morons??
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:27:34 AM

And now you're thinking:

"Oh, sh*t, they had me all along."

Because you know what? We do this for fun.

Every now and then, some lowlife like yourself crawls up in here and we enjoy giving him a lesson.

You're not smart, you're not funny.
You're just Tuesday's night dinner.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:28:16 AM

"I'd interpret that as, "You are the man. You are willing to reconcile and recognize a valid point when you hear one. How awesome."

Physician, heal thyself!
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:29:27 AM

"I'd interpret that as, "You are the man. You are willing to reconcile and recognize a valid point when you hear one. How awesome."

- If That's your interpretation, then you're still a moron who's in denial.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:29:29 AM

"Hey, Nitty, how's this for a change:

How can you tell if we were from the beggining just yanking your chain, of if that was all real criticism?

You can't!

So maybe we've just been playing you like a f*cking rag doll and had you jumping through loops to prove yourself, like the incoherent idiot you are.

Mindf*cking, uh?"

----Naw, not really. If it was my chain being yanked, a retreat from the chain-yanking position would have been made a tad earlier, like a, "dude, I'm just fking with ya!" moment. Ya know?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:34:28 AM

I hate it when they fold like Superman on laundry day, because that just takes all the rods out of my tent. I like it when they FIGHT. Gives me something to do. This guy is just lingering around like a Double Cheeseburger wrapper twirling in a wind eddie. You know, like unrecycled debris?
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:36:31 AM

"Naw, not really. If it was my chain being yanked, a retreat from the chain-yanking position would have been made a tad earlier, like a, "dude, I'm just fking with ya!" moment. Ya know?"

- Still thick. You missed that part were several of us stated the fun they have with this type of thing.
I wouldn't let you know that soon, that would have spoiled my fun.

And you STILL can't tell whether I'm just f*cking with you, or if I'm actually criticizing your poor taste in writing style, not to mention the wretched humor.

Want a disclaimer now?
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:40:31 AM

Jesus, man, you begin every retort with the word "Naw". I almost thought it was pomposity, but now, I just think you're just a yokel. You sound like a stock character in a Randy Quaid film.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:40:41 AM

"And you STILL can't tell whether I'm just f*cking with you, or if I'm actually criticizing your poor taste in writing style, not to mention the wretched humor."

Awww, but it's so much fun to do both at the same time. I mean, sh*ttyWit would know all about doing both at the same time, what, with all his lonely days in the trailer with dear old dad and brother Jeb.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:41:16 AM

"You sound like a stock character in a Randy Quaid film."

lol!
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:44:07 AM

"Naw, not really. If it was my chain being yanked, a retreat from the chain-yanking position would have been made a tad earlier, like a, "dude, I'm just fking with ya!" moment. Ya know?"

Unlike down in your dad's basement, we like to use really long chains around here.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:44:29 AM

Naw.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:46:31 AM

c-prime, you just gave me the funniest mental picture of this bozo.

Now I'm adding the line dancing to the picture and he's turning into a somewhat funny retard in my imagination.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:46:54 AM

I see he's been reduced to a caricature of his former self. Like a doc*ment xeroxed too many times, he'll start to fade a way soon.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:48:36 AM

Naw. "Away" is one word.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:48:57 AM

See, Nitty? See what c-prime did?
THAT'S how you do humor.

Take notes, or you'll die an unfunny, ignorant, stubborn f*ck.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:54:21 AM

Haha, schoolyard tots sucking each other's d*cks on the internet. "See, THAT's how you defend blah blah blah." Haha. Cute. I still think this is the highlight of the day, where minkowski kindly takes the time to quote and respond to everything in the original post.

"The following is the definitive list of the best movies of 2009 (so far) as deemed by very important people qualified to be making such judgments."

Because we all know 'very important people' are always right and what they say is the absolute truth and the last word on the matter, right?

"The following list is not simply the opinion of one critic/journalist/director, or even several, but the objective truth."

There is no objective truth in art. That's why it's called art and not science.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:54:33 AM

Where in hell were you raised, TittyPity? Wanker County?
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:56:24 AM

And then the sidekick, Peter Parker chimes in:

Your worshiped "Objective Makers of Definitive Lists" don't apply here.

You're trying to use a form of evaluating the merits of movies applying rigid criteria. Well, guess what, you can't put movies in test tubes and examine them in a process similar to breaking down molecules.

Cinema, being a form of art, cannot be subjected to that type of analysis.


-----Classic stuff. We should do this again sometime, kids.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:58:08 AM

"We should do this again sometime, kids."

I imagine you use that line a lot as you're closing the ice cream van door.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:00:17 AM

Wow, that's it? You went back to read everything all over again and that's all you could find?
You get tired easy.

"Classic stuff. We should do this again sometime, kids."

- Sure. Do drop by. I enjoyed raping you.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:01:49 AM

"Haha, schoolyard tots sucking each other's d*cks on the internet."

You've really got a thing for kids and d*ck sucking, don't you?

"See, THAT's how you defend blah blah blah."

Ah, your most intelligent statement yet.

"Haha."

What we DIDN'T say after your initial post.

"Cute."

Thanks but I dig chicks.

"I still think this is the highlight of the day,"


And that's just sad. To think the highlight of your day is getting your ass kicked by a bunch of strangers over the internet.

"where minkowski kindly takes the time to quote and respond to everything in the original post."

Finally you can say someone actually notices that you're alive. Quick, find someone that cares!
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:04:14 AM

"You get tired easy."

I've seen kitchen sponges with more backbone than this guy.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:07:11 AM

He's now reading everything through, once again, trying to grab hold of something to use.

Stubborn little yellow f*ck.

Reminds me of retards, trying to put the cube through the triangle hole.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:10:02 AM

"Reminds me of retards, trying to put the cube through the triangle hole."

Future job skill for him, I bet, but moved from the classroom to the street corner and back alley.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:12:39 AM

Wow, that's it? You went back to read everything all over again and that's all you could find?

-Naw, its just the one I liked best. Hence the word, "highlight."
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:12:44 AM

Looking over the conversation here, I have a feeling our little punching bag is actually Murphyslaw93 under a different name.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:14:02 AM

Naw, here's a highlight just for you:

http://www.highlights.com/
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:22:48 AM

Haha, still going? Here's a little more fodder for you then. Punching bag? That's pretty funny. I'm simply an observer at a zoo. Watching little monkeys get excited over nothing. Feelings all hurt for God knows what reason. Just popping my head in every now and then and giving them something to lash out at.

"BOO HOO I'm angry at you so I'm going to make d*ck jokes about you! Your d*ck is small!"
"Haha, good one buddy! That's how you make a d*ck joke."
"Yea, we spend way too much time jerking each other off on the internet."

It's quite pathetic. I feel pathetic for enjoying getting a rise out of you kids. Does that make me a terrible human being?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:25:51 AM

"i dont get how so many of you are commentingn on a film website when you apparently barely see any movies"

Well, let's see. If I said I had seen ALL of these recent movies, would you then say "man, you have no f*cking life"? Yeah, probably.

So forgive me, at least, for not finding the time to explore the last several months of mainstream films that I could not catch in theaters and that haven't hit DVD or BluRay yet.

And since you want to get someone defensive, most likely me, I'll say that I watch several movies throughout a week, most of the time much older films. So thanks for your concern and caring. *sshole.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:30:42 AM

"get excited over nothing"

- What do you mean, over nothing? We're raping you, dude. It's entertaining.

"I feel pathetic for enjoying getting a rise out of you kids."

- No. You felt pathetic before logging on to search for boyfriends. What you feel now is violated, cowardliness, incoherency and loneliness.

"Does that make me a terrible human being?"

- No. Giving AIDS to little boys does.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:33:24 AM

And yes, you are, in deed, a punching bag.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:36:58 AM

"Haha, still going?'

What's with the inquisition into my 'movement'? Feeling me up?


"Here's a little more fodder for you then."


Every post you've made is less like fodder and more like manure. Any reply to one of your posts is a flower growing in sh*t.

"Punching bag?"


Yeah, just like your colon.


"That's pretty funny."


And yet, no one will ever say that to anything you've posted, especially your first post.

"I'm simply an observer at a zoo."


Yeah, you're the crying kid that just lost his balloon.


"Watching little monkeys get excited over nothing."

Well, I've always fancied myself more a great ape, because they have big d*cks, but ok, at least you admit you're the nothing we're excited over.


"Feelings all hurt for God knows what reason."


I think we've made it very clear why we hurt your feelings. But you are one thickheaded f*ck.


"Just popping my head in"


I'm so sure of that.


"every now and then and giving them something to lash out at."



You like getting whipped don;t you? You little Sadomasochistic bitch.


"BOO HOO I'm angry at you so I'm going to make d*ck jokes about you! Your d*ck is small!"


I hear they have implants for your little d*ck, kid. Not my area of expertise. Just go ask daddy. Or dandy.


"Haha, good one buddy! That's how you make a d*ck joke."


And by joke, you mean orgasm?


"Yea, we spend way too much time jerking each other off on the internet."


Hey, man, no need to share your Friday night routine with us.


"It's quite pathetic."


I'm sure you hear that a lot.


"I feel pathetic"


I can only guess self esteem is a bitch to fix when you look like a transvestite orangutan.


"for enjoying getting a rise out of you kids."


There it is again. Kids and an erection. What the f*ck is it with your erection and kids?


"Does that make me a terrible human being?"

No.You'd have to be human first.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:37:38 AM

"BOO HOO I'm angry at you so I'm going to make d*ck jokes about you! Your d*ck is small!"
"Haha, good one buddy! That's how you make a d*ck joke."

- The d*ck jokes ARE excellent analogies, actually. After all, you ARE getting raped (another good analogy).

But you're certainly enjoying the anal bleeding, and I for one am feeling generous, so I'll keep f*cking you over and over again...
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:39:46 AM

"I'm simply an observer at a zoo."

Of course you are. It's LGBT Day. Hey, I just used a (real) acronym!

And remember: when you read the signs that say "Don't feed the animals", that does include your body parts.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:42:51 AM

"And remember: when you read the signs that say "Don't feed the animals", that does include your body parts."


-------Yeah, I'll remember that the next time I get tempted to stick my d*ck in your mouth. Haha. (Hint: I'm roleplaying Peter Parker). Blah blah blah ass blah blah rape you blah blah d*ck blah blah.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:48:12 AM

Are you done, TwitZit? if so, go away. I want to finish Triangle. And I mean the film, not a game of d*ck Twister at your house.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:49:20 AM

"I can only guess self esteem is a bitch to fix when you look like a transvestite orangutan"

----Haha. What's the point of that? This is clearly the internet, and you clearly have no idea what I look like. However, transvestite orangutan would be a surprisingly apt description for the photo next to your name.

minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:51:23 AM

Yeah. That was predictable. So, like are you done? Seriously. Because if you are, just slink back to your fitted plastic sheets and your Care Bear night light and say bye bye to all the bad dreams. Tomorrow (today) will be a better day.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:52:41 AM

"(Hint: I'm roleplaying Peter Parker)"

- We knew that you can't do humor, that you can't do reasoning, now we know you can't do roleplaying either.
What an endless pit of incompetence you've turned out to be!

BTW, my d*ck IS still in your mouth.


Here, I'll play your part now:

"Hey, hey, look at me! I'm gonna talk fancy and see if I can make online friends!
What, you don't like me?
Wait, I was kidding, you guys!
I invented that acronym to be funny! I made everything up, I swear!
Seriously, you guys have to believe me!
Please like me!"

There, Nitty in a nutshell.
Take notes, retard, I just taught you something else.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:54:45 AM

No. Seriously. Transvestite orangutan. I couldn't have come up with better for that photo. Props man. Over and out.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:55:58 AM

"Haha. What's the point of that? This is clearly the internet, and you clearly have no idea what I look like."

- Any random generic description of a loser suits you just perfectly, I know that, you know that, we all know that.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 2:58:51 AM

"Yeah, I'll remember that the next time I get tempted to stick my d*ck in your mouth. Haha."

No room, son. I'm giving cunnilingus to your mom right now and her cooter's wider than Wilt Chamberlain's arm span.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:01:25 AM

It's so funny how earnest the two of you are. You try so hard. After so many hours, still going at it. Soldier on! It's good stuff. I will most definitely be back for more of this. I wanna show my friends (real life ones, you wouldn't know about it).
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:02:33 AM

Make that the 3 of ya.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:02:55 AM

"No. Seriously."

I believe YOU mean "Naw. Seriously." Jesus, sh*t-for-brains, do I have to remind you how to be you? (The answer to that is "no" as that would require the capability of tying d*cks into knots in my mouth with no hands.)
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:04:11 AM

That's right, I look like a transvestite orangutan. I admit it! But hey, I've got balls to put my picture on the net, you hide behind a gay-assed nick and no image whatsoever. But you're quick with the *sshole bullsh*t posts no one wants to read.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:05:06 AM

The "naw" was mostly for minkowski's sake. He bitched about it after, I dunno, the 3rd usage? So I made it a point to keep going.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:06:47 AM

"(real life ones, you wouldn't know about it)."

Damn right I don't know about your YMCA shower buddies. f*cking redneck goat humping son of a crackwhore's daughter.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:07:57 AM

Naw.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:08:38 AM

"The "naw" was mostly for minkowski's sake. He bitched about it after, I dunno, the 3rd usage? So I made it a point to keep going."

So you used 'naw' three times, but then continued using it for my sake? That just makes you more than stupid, that makes you a glutton for punishment.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:08:41 AM

"I wanna show my friends (real life ones, you wouldn't know about it)"

- It doesn't count as friends when you have to pay for it.

But please, DO show everybody you know. Then there will be even more people laughing at you.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:12:07 AM

Hey, do you live in Vermont, Nittygritty? Check your Youtube account. I sent you a message.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:12:10 AM

So you used 'naw' three times, but then continued using it for my sake? That just makes you more than stupid, that makes you a glutton for punishment.

---What punishment? Watching a bunch of kids get excited and throw tantrums? That's just tonight's selection of entertainment.
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:13:19 AM

"Soldier on!"

Can do, Mr. Rear Admirer...er, I mean Admiral. My whole naval fleet is coursing through your mother's gaping mouth as we speak.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:15:59 AM

Where the hell did you get Vermont from?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:16:14 AM

"Watching a bunch of kids get excited and throw tantrums? That's just tonight's selection of entertainment."

I'm seriously sensing that you're a pedophile, ThePrettyKiddie.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:17:21 AM

Google search. ThegrittyNitty returns but a few results. I guess no one is gay enough to use the nick, save you.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:17:48 AM

"That's just tonight's selection of entertainment."

- As opposed to your usual date with a Doberman and a jar of peanut butter?
Well, you must be delighted! Getting f*cked in many ways, your dream come true.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:20:30 AM

"I'm seriously sensing that you're a pedophile, ThePrettyKiddie."

---There you go again, missing the finer points. The kids in question are in fact grown adults, who are being referred to as kids for their immature behavior. Your profile says you're 28. That wouldn't make me a pedophile, just...gay.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:20:52 AM

Way off base with Vermont, btw.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:21:09 AM

"What punishment?"

The punishment you inflict on yourself, without me or anyone else saying a word, by using the rancorously redneck word naw. You bring it all on yourself.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:22:46 AM

I don't give a sh*t where you live, TGN. For all I know you've got a cell at Riker's Island with some guy named Jojo.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:22:54 AM

"Google search. ThegrittyNitty returns but a few results. I guess no one is gay enough to use the nick, save you."

----I think the point is to pick something, you know, unique? So that it's not taken?
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:24:14 AM

"The punishment you inflict on yourself, without me or anyone else saying a word, by using the rancorously redneck word naw. You bring it all on yourself."

----Either that or black. 'Nah mean?
c-prime writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:28:32 AM

"TheGrittyNitwit" would've been more a more true to life appellation. Or just ditch the whole spin on words and go by your birth name: "d*ckhumperblower".
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:29:40 AM

"I think the point is to pick something, you know, unique? So that it's not taken?"

- And out of all the infinite possibilities, that's what you were able to come up with?
Nice going!

Another excellent affirmation of good taste and a true testament to your capabilities of presenting yourself to others!
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:33:42 AM

"TheGrittyNitwit" would've been more a more true to life appellation. Or just ditch the whole spin on words and go by your birth name: "d*ckhumperblower".

----The game you play isn't all that sophisticated. Why don't we go by your birth name, "He-who-licks-scrotums." OR was it, "Grandma banging, c*ck sucking, sh*t-for-brained, pencil-d*ck?" OOoohh genius. Not. Grow up.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:34:47 AM

See, Nitty? After all this, you're STILL here. You must have realized by now how fun it is for us to play you around.

You're thick and all but, by now, it should be hitting you.

We enjoy puling the strings and watching you dance, puppet. Don't go anywhere. Keep it up.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:35:30 AM

"Another excellent affirmation of good taste and a true testament to your capabilities of presenting yourself to others!"

Haha, this coming from Peter Parker. With an image to boot! Dork.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:43:11 AM

"Haha, this coming from Peter Parker. With an image to boot!"

- Exactly!! Wanna compare the difference in taste... Mr. Full Of Nits?
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:45:49 AM

I believe Peter is a Spiderman fan, no harm there, but what the f*ck does TheNittyGritty mean?Why not just call yourself He Who Has the Gayest Nick? More fitting and I don't mind using it to address you.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:48:27 AM

sh*ttyNitty or Grittysh*tty would have done you more justice, since that's what you are, just full of sh*t.

You're just mad because your plan didn't go well.
You were mocked and made fun of.

And you don't want to believe you're just a puppet, but here you are, still dancing.

Open your eyes, silly boy.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:52:59 AM

This guy's boring the hell out of me. I just wish he'd shut the f*ck up. Go crawl up in a hole somewhere and die. He's about as interesting as watching j*zz dry, something I am sure he could tell us all about.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:54:59 AM

Holy sh*t, Peter Parker you're 30? I tried to keep a distance from the low blows and generic name calling and things of that sort...but 30?!?! Wow... Damn, your life must be going nowhere. And minkowski 28? Talk about a bunch of f*cking losers. I'm sorry life's not working out for you, no wonder the two of you are so f*cking bitter. Sad little existence that you call life. Wake up and smell the roses. Your behavior is juvenile. It's indicative of more deep-rooted issues that should be dealt with immediately before it's too late. It's called growing the f*ck up.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:00:00 AM

I'm not 28 moron. I'm 99. I have no idea where you got that age from, but you should ask for refund.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:03:00 AM

Dude, stfu. Don't even deny it. It's pathetic. I'm through talking. You're too old to be behaving the way you do. It's too sad to be fun anymore. I'm done. I'm out. Payce. Good luck in life.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:04:32 AM

And....yeah, like we're going to take life advice from some idiot that posts meaningless sh*t he calls a joke but for some reason still tenaciously defends. A junk post full of sentences so preposterously juvenile, pretentious and maladroitly worded you'd think it was cobbled together from the rantings of a mad man. And all done to impress total strangers.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:06:15 AM

Yeah, I'd like to know where you got '28' from. I can assure you I am not 28. Not by a country mile. So either put up, human StairMaster, or shut the f*ck up.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:09:37 AM

I really enjoy being psychoanalyzed by someone of this fool's caliber. I mean, he starts this sh*t with some incomprehensibly stupid f*cking post, all done to supposedly manipulate us, the other posters, yet somehow we're the ones with social issues. I was content to talk about Tarantino's little list until he arrived, luring people in with is stupid comment.
triggax writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:14:53 AM

This is still on?...

Dude nitty gritty...
WTF Man... give it up... You're completely retarded..

This whole scenario is entirely unfortunate..

Hope those jelly babies are starting to taste a little nice.. faggot.. f*ck your self...
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:24:53 AM

He got so totally owned and boned. And I'm quite sure he'll experience difficulty walking tomorrow.
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:41:42 AM

Observe and report might be the most underestimated movie of the year, nice to see some recognition for it. Even if it's only one guy's opinion.
Eben1277 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 6:19:58 AM

f*ck me man, I wish I was here last night... grittytittie, Mink is right. Insofar as the first half of posts on this page anyway, I couldn't be bothered to read up until the end. Your posting is unnecessarily verbose. I understand it was an attempt at dry humor, possibly mocking long winded people, or perhaps the long windedness of it was itself the humor, but it was just too much to be effective. Some few people may have found it funny. That's the nature of humor, not everyone always finds the same sh*t funny. But for the most part, you really fell flat with it. It was just too much to be an effective joke of any sort. Comedy needs to be short, unless of course there is a seriously good punch line. Even then, usually, the shorter the better. There are exceptions to that, but generally speaking it's an accurate statement. Your posting, not one of the exceptions. About half as much bullsh*t and the exaggeration might have been funny, but as is, it's just boring.

Oh and Gran Torino is just an amazing film, anyone who feels otherwise is entitled to their opinion, but chances are they are being shortsighted.
Eben1277 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 6:29:15 AM

I can't believe this sh*t went on for like 5 hours
Eben1277 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 6:35:32 AM

Goddamnit this string is so long I forgot what the f*ck I came one the internet for in the first place!!!! Not porn (at the moment, my wife's home, and I have to go to work, otherwise, that would probably be it)... TittieNitters really f*cked up my morning right now man.
J.A.Ottley writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:46:38 AM

Hmmmm Star Trek, Drag Me To Hell, Up In The Air &
Chocolate would definately be on my list, that is if he is referring to the Chocolate starring Jeeja Yajin
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:47:15 AM

That was fun. A little boring more towards the end, but still, for the most of it, fun.
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:56:20 AM

I've just read through every god damn post now (round of applause) and I must say: Nitty you stupid fool. I must confess, sometimes your posts, Mink, with all uber-seriousness are bit boring to read through, even though I tend to agree with you. But you and PP really tore Nitty's tiny ass to pieces (round of applause). Can't wait until next he posts. Hopefully he team up with Dandy and Legacy for an ultimate gay-bash.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 8:48:30 AM

Wow this post sure ended up going nowhere fast.

As for QT's Top 8, I never would have put Observe and Report, Funny People, or Chocolate anywhere close to this list. Chocolate was like a Thai after school special about the consequences of pissing off the retarded. Minus the Hispanic guy, there was nothing interesting about O&R, and there was barely anything funny about Funny Pepole. QT did manage to put the two most entertaining films of the year at the top of his list so it wasn't all bad, but didn't he see D9, how does that not make the list?

I'm assuming that since The Road only made one WP poster's list that many people didn't see it. Too Bad, it easily was one of 09's best too.

The unrated version of Taken was f*cking awesome! Much better than the last Bourne and Bond movies. Its been a long time since I had seen a film so perfectly packaged and to the point as Taken. It sure doesn't take long for Liam to turn France upside down and really kick some ass, and unlike Bourne or Bond he KILLS almost everyone who gets in his ways. "I told you I'd find you." (classic!) Finally an international thriller with balls! f*ck the American PG-13 version!
For similar reasons, I also thought The International was one of the better films of the year.

Last but not definitely not least, since everyone is putting Gran Torino (08) on the their lists I feel the need to put Let the Right One in on mine. I dont think this film was ever released theatrically in the US so it was technically a 09 dvd release here (I could still be wrong but f*ck it). Regardless of its release date it might be the one of the best films made in the last 10 years!
avaela writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 10:37:49 AM

I don't see why so many ppl think Let the Right One In was an amazing movie, after reading the book, the movie was kinda meh to me.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:08:42 PM

Isn't that the case with most films that follow a great book. I didn't read the book so all I have to compare it to are other vampire movies and other horror films. As that goes its a recent masterpiece IMO. Frankly I'm glad they change some elements of the book. The androgeny and the pedophilia would have been too weird for me and would have distracted from the overall appeal of the film. I really liked the relationship between the main characters that the director conveyed on camera. He also showed a very subtle ability to take all of the old traditional vamp aspects and effects and make them look new. Adjusting the girls eyes as she entered a dark room, changing actresses when the girl lost control, having her bleed black goo when she entered uninvited, never showing her teeth but covering her (a child) in blood, showing her strength and flying ability by showing a kid's feet drag through the water before he gets decapitated, all very well done. I cant speak for how the book displays all of this but I think the director does a very good job. Its a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stale genre.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 12:55:35 PM

"Mink, with all uber-seriousness are bit boring to read through, even though I tend to agree with you."

You thought I was being 'uber-serious'? What part of my replies did you miss? Almost everyone was a knock on GrittyNitty's head.
WeThePeople writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 1:14:53 PM

Not surprising.
Vin12 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 3:50:47 PM

TOTALLY AGREE ABOUT ST09
Freudian_Nightmare writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:01:33 PM

@Mink: No no. Not these ones. They're all pure golden.
minkowski writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:28:22 PM

Oh, ok, well thanks.
The_Joker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 4:50:17 PM

Alright my top 8:)

1.The Hangover
2.Inglourious basterds
3.Friday the 13th(Not that bad too me)
4.Harry Potter
5.District 9
6.Paranormal Activity(pretty cool)
7.Law abiding citizen(sick)
8.Brothers(noicee)

Not in order and some others i would put in top 15:P
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 5:15:13 PM

Eben, in reply to your post that begins, “Your posting is unnecessarily verbose. I understand it was an attempt at dry humor, possibly mocking long winded people, or perhaps the long windedness of it was itself the humor, but it was just too much to be effective.”

I say that's a fair point you are absolutely entitled to, but if you look at my responses, it was never really about the actual merits of original post. If the above quote from you had been the first and only reply to the original post, the thread of the conversation would have ended right there. Whether it was funny, or not, or had any merit or redeeming value whatsoever wasn't the grounds on which I was fighting. The drawn-out back-and-forth started with minkowski's insulting and preaching:

---------------------
“The idiot makes no sense! He or he is too busy rattling off tortured sentences to say simply what he or she means.”

“Articulation is the ability to express yourself clearly and concisely, and it is not a long string of sophomoric pretentious gobbledygook that leaves many a reader wondering just what the f*ck is being communicated.”

“Just say what you mean to say moron and try not confuse and gunk it up with pretentious crap. The art of articulation is employing the most effective method in conveying your ideas to the widest audience. So you're shooting yourself in the foot and the d*ck here with sentences that mean next to nothing.”
-------------------------------------

Now, I will be the first to concede that the post was long-winded, pretentious, and convoluted. I mean, THAT WAS THE POINT. Tell me that you GET that the post was a poor attempt to present one person's opinion about movies in what he had hoped would be a marginally entertaining manner, but if it was poorly executed and I should f*ck off and die for the epic fail, then so be it. Whatever yo, it's not a chip off my shoulder. I can live with that and just move on and say, “Thank you for your opinion, have a nice day.” But when you rattle off about how “articulation is the ability to express yourself clearly” and criticize the pretentiousness, that just tells me you missed the point. Also, convoluted though it was, I feel that what was stated in the original post makes sense --- in a tortured way, sure --- but it's structured, grammatically correct for the most part, and is clearly not just a string of random words strung together without meaning. So I also disagreed with minkowski's claims that “it made no sense.”

Minkowski then proceeded to deconstruct the original post line by line, pointing out the very logical inconsistencies that were the part-and-parcel of why I wrote it in that way in the first place. For example:

-----------------------------
"The following is the definitive list of the best movies of 2009 (so far) as deemed by very important people qualified to be making such judgments."

-Because we all know 'very important people' are always right and what they say is the absolute truth and the last word on the matter, right?
-----------------------

Um, yea, you're exactly right Mink...and that was the point.

--------------------
"The following list is not simply the opinion of one critic/journalist/director, or even several, but the objective truth."

-There is no objective truth in art. That's why it's called art and not science.
--------------------------------------

Uh, duh? t's not simply the opinion of one profressional, or even several, but the OJECTIVE TRUTH? Where did this objective truth come from? Did it drop out of the sky? Something so subjective is by necessity the opinion of SOMEBODY. C'mon, is the playfulness of the tone really that hard to perceive?

---------------------------------
"The OMDL predicts with 95.3% certainty that Avatar will replace one of the above movies,"

-Well hell, a bunch of people predict that a film that cost 300 million will replace at the very least Bad Lieutenant! Well f*ck me! Who they predict to win the 2010 Super Bowl? Because I want to place bets now, damnit.
----------------------------

Um, again, yes. You are absolutely right. These all-knowing Objective Makers of Definitive Lists use “rigorous statistical analysis” to come to a conclusion that a monkey with a tv set could come up with on the toilet seat. It's Avatar fanboy love cloaked in faux scientific lingo.

I can go ahead do this for every line he wrote, but you get the idea I hope. After this, the comments quickly degenerated into an assault on the senses -- all manner of talk involving bodily fluids, mother banging, anal intrusion, and all that other stuff I stopped finding funny in 8th grade. They shifted gears and claimed I was backpedaling on my position because of their oh-so-witty verbal abuse (puhleeeze), now I was only "claiming" to have been "joking" all along, when that was in fact what I said from MY VERY FIRST RESPONSE to Minkowski. I quote:

"Tortured, yes. Not so sure about, "makes no sense." Most of it makes perfect sense. In an oh-so-tortured way, yes, but the meaning of what is being said should be clear to anyone who doesn't have sh*t for brains. Most of it. THE PRETENTIOUS GOBBLEDYGOOD IS PART OF THE JOKE? C'mon now..." (Caps added)

I quickly realized all semblance of meaningful communication was thrown out the window, and for minkowski and his over-eager sidekick PP, the name of the game was 'middle school playground antics.' I mean, TwittyBitty? RinkyDinky? He Who Has the Gayest Nick? Haha, WTF is that? How juvenile can you get? It's just a screenname, I really couldn't give a sh*t about that, or what you say about my mother whom you've never met, or where you want to spray your bodily fluids. But I was having a relatively decent time on a slow Tuesday night watching these two over-enthusiastic, shrill little monkeys go apesh*t because they finally found a target to sling their sh*t at, so I gave them enough to keep it going. That is, until I found out how old they were. It was amusing when I thought they were just kids, but guys that should be well into their careers...maybe even a family? sh*t, that's just worse than pathetic.

So yea, Eben, call it what you want. A flop of epic proportions. A waste of bandwith. But don't get the wrong idea. I was never defending the inherent value of the post. That's not what this was about.

So that's 15 minutes out of my day, and however many hours last night. Let's get back to movies now.
SACdaddy writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 6:08:48 PM

@Gritty: move on man.

How could I forget about Inglorious Basterds? I saw that movie 3 times the theaters. By far the best film of the year! Guess QT couldn't put his own film on the list.

Its good to see that most people had enough class to leave films like Wolverine, Transformers 2, and Terminator off the their lists and in the trash where they belong. I would put Watchmen on this list of castaways too but I understand people's love-hate relationship with the film. At least it was a visually stunning film.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 6:23:34 PM

I still have to see Up in the Air. The only real contender left aside from Avatar.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:02:50 PM

Nitty, you're still just a puppet, you're still dancing.

Last night, while you were ever so busy trying to do damage control, I was enjoying the verbal abuse. Simple fun. I do that often on this website. And you STILL don't get it.
Try to wrap your head around that concept. You were mocked, it's that simple.
I never cared about your logic or thought process, I was just out to make fun of you.

Your repeated attempts to justify yourself are making you look EVEN more pathetic because (sound the ruffs)... nobody cares!

Yes, you failed miserably from the get go with your tedious humor. You continued to fail by not realizing you were just a sitting duck to throw insults at.
I can be a sadistic prick at times, but hey, nobody's perfect. You did provide some entertainment for a few hours, though. Feel free to take some solace in that.

And it was too bad mink beat me to it. Although his presence enriched the show tremendously, in case he hadn't been around, I would have been more than happy in putting you in your place all by myself.

"That is, until I found out how old they were. It was amusing when I thought they were just kids, but guys that should be well into their careers...maybe even a family?"

- Your ignorance on this one is, truly, your bliss.

Now go ahead and talk movies, if that's what you're here to do. I don't find you entertaining anymore. You're in denial.
You're a broken record.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:13:29 PM

Uh, yeah whatever man.

Anyway, I also forgot about Harry Brown. Hearing mixed reviews on that, but some people seem to like it enough that I should check it out before making any "definitive lists." haha
Eben1277 writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:31:53 PM

Now what would have been funny, would be if Nitty had said, "The Definitive Committee of Ass f*cking Migrant Workers (DCAFMW) rates Gran Torino poorly because it lacks representation for gay Latinos." That sh*t would have been funny.
Peter Parker writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 7:48:53 PM

@ Eben:

LOOOL! That was, if fact, some of the funniest sh*t this entire thread had so far.

@ Nitty:

See? Again, that's how you do humor.

Now, regarding "Harry Brown". Do check it out, definitely an interesting movie. Not for all tastes, though.
Michael Caine delivered a solid performance. Emily Mortimer seems to have grown with/for her part. A fine supporting actress. Much better off in the drama/thriller genre, than in crappy comedies.

"Harry Brown" has a place in any list, definitive or not (aha), that serves to discriminate good movies in 2009.
TheGrittyNitty writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 8:56:14 PM

Eben, I believe you may be on to something. Haha

Yeah, others have expressed similar sentiments regarding Harry Brown so it's definitely on my priority list.

As for Gran Torino, I loved the plot synopsis and pretty much everything Clint Eastwood, so I had really high expectations for that movie walking in. I watched it and liked it, but I just felt like it could have been so much better. The casting didn't really do it for me, and I feel like more could have been done to raise the stakes and elevate the sense of danger and tension...among other things I don't recall specifically, I'd have to go watch it again since it's been a while. But I mean, those "thugs" looked like chumps to me. I have friends I'm more scared of than the punks in that movie. My two cents.

Aaron writes:
on December 16th, 2009 at 9:26:27 PM

Ya'll need to lighten up.
Ranger writes:
on December 17th, 2009 at 1:59:01 AM

Oh suck it!

There's a Good Reason Why Luke Skywalker Isn't on "Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Poster

"The Walking Dead" Fan Kills Friend Who Turned Into a Zombie

"Indiana Jones" Producer Says Harrison Ford Will Not Be Recast

Ridley Scott Reveals Another Title for "Prometheus" Sequel

Johnny Depp and Edgar Wright Team for "Fortunately, the Milk"

"Spectre" Breaks Box Office Records Overseas

"Star Wars: The Force Awakens" Demolishes Pre-Sale Records

Paul Bettany Responds to Jason Statham's "Avengers" Insult

Daniel Craig Would Rather Commit Suicide Than Return as James Bond

Marvel Has Contingency Plans In Case It Regains Rights to Superheroes
Lace Wedding Dresses from ViViDress UK online shop, buy with confidence and cheap price.
WorstPreviews.com hosted by pair Networks WorstPreviews.com
Hosted by pair Networks
News Feeds | Box Office | Movie Reviews | Buzz: Top 100 | Popularity: Top 100
Poster Store | About Us | Advertising | Contact Us | Privacy Policy | Web Tools | Site Map
Copyright © 2009 WorstPreviews.com. All rights reserved