BF2S Forums Rate the last movie you've seen

Uzique wrote:

of everyone on this forum... you cannot point that stick

have you read your video-game reviews? holy shit. video-games are not art. you write about them as if they are.

kill your pathetic self

Uzique wrote:

of everyone on this forum... you cannot point that stick

no no no

same old bullshit all the time

unimaginative, no effort fuckers being stupid and contradictory and incredibly dense on purpose and calling it 'trolling'

that's not 'trolling', it's not even fucking witty. it's being obtuse and dumb. it doesn't even get a laugh.

well..you did start it by posting that picture

very poorly

please see your super-serious, pretentious 5 paragraph long reviews

if i can give fine cinema a quick paragraph (which is just serving the function of providing more than some asinine, arbitrary number) and be deserving of ridicule for it... then what do your essays deserve? serious recognition? they're pretentious and doubly deserving of your "graphic commentary" (rofl) for the VERY reason that video-games are not art. it's directly relevant. if someone writing a paragraph of artistic critique of a valid art-form is laughable... what is an in-depth analysis of a video-game?

"kys"

far more FOR THE REASON that seriously reviewing games is inherently less 'deserving' than film

games are not art - there is not so much to appreciate or write about - you write far fucking more
cinema is art - there is much to appreciate and a well-defined set of aesthetic assessments, shared by a social framework - i write far less

dont even try to argue. it was a shit troll. go to bed.

Uzique wrote:

far more FOR THE REASON that seriously reviewing games is inherently less 'deserving' than film

games are not art - there is not so much to appreciate or write about - you write far fucking more
cinema is art - there is much to appreciate and a well-defined set of aesthetic assessments, shared by a social framework - i write far less

Again, a topic for another thread, but I'll address it once more here:

Ebert makes some good points against games being art, but people forget that his reviews are opinion-based. It's an experienced opinion, but still just an opinion. The argument is actually far to ambiguous to qualify for certain either way. However, as it stands, games do have a loyal following of players, reviewers, review readers and 'appreciators.' It should be enough for people to be able to treat them like art and for those who don't to have their ranting soundly ignored by those who do.

That said, I don't see how any of my game reviews are any more pretentious than that movie review of yours. I simply rate different aspects of the games: gameplay, interface/menu, graphics, design, sound and music, as well as point out bits and pieces of it that are common from game to game that I may or may not like. They may be long, but I do believe they lack that stereotypical flair of art snobbery.

The only way yours could have looked any more pretentious is if you posted a picture of yourself in front of a fireplace sporting a monocle, a pipe and a smoking jacket with your hand caressing the stony scalp of a bust of William Shakespeare. If you don't like that description, than you can feel free to bug out of shitting on anyone else's critiques.

dont even try to argue. it was a shit troll. go to bed.

LOL, ~11PM here when you wrote that.

Uzique wrote:

if i can give fine cinema a quick paragraph (which is just serving the function of providing more than some asinine, arbitrary number) and be deserving of ridicule for it... then what do your essays deserve? serious recognition? they're pretentious and doubly deserving of your "graphic commentary" (rofl) for the VERY reason that video-games are not art. it's directly relevant. if someone writing a paragraph of artistic critique of a valid art-form is laughable... what is an in-depth analysis of a video-game?"

Who are you to decide what is and isn't a valid art form?

Didn't the literati scoff at films in the early days? Graphic novels?

People are already extolling the brilliance of Pac-Man for its graphic design and game-play, no doubt this trend will continue.

Uzique wrote:

graphic design and gameplay is not 'art'. there is no definition of art, nor any aesthetic criteria, that applaud 'graphics design'.

no the literati did not scoff at cinema. nor photography. they were new emerging artforms that merely needed evaluative norms to be developed before they could be considered within a social (i.e. critical) context. new art forms are exciting but they need time to develop certain standards and generic expectations. a video-game will never have that because the closest it approaches as a form is 'entertainment'. entertainment is one big rung below 'art' on the ladder of creative expression. it's like saying that america's got talent and the x factor is 'art'. no, it's entertainment. like a video-game.

who am i? who are you? where am i saying this is just my own opinion and judgement? it's not. it's everyone's. carry on.

There are numerous definitions of art that video games could fall quite neatly into, those by Plato and other roughly contemporaneous philosophers define art as the imitation of nature. Many video games are filled with plenty of creative and artistic expression.

The truth is that all these definitions are extremely subjective, as any examination of this subject is likely to be. I doubt you would find many people who would deny that video game are, to date, an inferior art form. Certainly there haven't been games to rival any great artistic works, but who is to say that there will not be, or even that this should prevent them from being considered art?

It is strange that you should mention Roger Ebert, as your opinion (or everyones, as you put it earlier) on this topic seems almost indistinguishable from his. That is by no means a universally held opinion.

Computer games are entertainment as is cinema. Most of the rubbish churned out by Hollywood is no more deserving of artistic acclaim than some games. Why should art not entertain? Shakespeare wrote his plays as entertainment. Art and entertainment are by no means mutually exclusive terms.

Over recent years games have certainly progressed towards being considered an art form - if they are not already. Reviews of games on programmes like Front Row where they are being reviewed alongside things like the latest offering from the RSC certainly show that attitudes towards games as a legitimate form of artistic expression are more progressive than you appear to believe.

Are video games art? Who can say. There are certainly valid arguments why they could be considered art. Is your opinion on this subject universally held amongst critics? Certainly not.

Men of Honor  7/10

the alternate ending was complete shite

das leben der anderen - 9/10.

what a phenomenal human drama. fantastic staging (cold war east-germany) involving the stasi and a typical east-west plot... but this is SO much more. it's a drama about human relationships, about ideology, about human convictions and faith in said ideology... about personal beliefs, emotions and idealisms being tested to the extreme. the film has fantastic production, very strong acting (the main 'antagonist' puts in one of the most fantastic lead-male performances i can remember... so understated and so subtle, much like billy bob thornton in the coen brother's 'the man who wasn't there', himself an archetype of the absurd-hero from albert camus' fiction). the slow and brilliant suspense running through this film is just as you'd expect from something with a cold war setting/genre, and the 'climax' scene (i won't spoil it in the slightest) was almost unbearable in terms of its head-on meeting of emotions and ideology, compounded and viewed through very believable and tortured characters.

do recommend. i'm on a foreign-language film spree at the moment and this is possibly right up there with 3 previous french films i have mentioned.

Last edited by Uzique (2011-01-03 21:37:37)

i suppose you've studied the history of opera and it's socio-cultural development from classical traditions and through european history? or are you talking more rubbish? you insist on engaging me on debate about the arts in every single sub-forum and every single thread, but you bring absolutely no fact, reality or even crappy anecdotes to 'back up' your claims. opera, particularly tragedy but also other sorts, all stems from classic greek drama which has ALWAYS been a form of high-art... for as long as art has been defined.

i really can't be bothered to waste air on you. do i try to lecture you on engineering? it's only your own arrogance that supposes you can fill in the gaps about the arts without needing as much education and research as you have done yourself, personally, into the sciences. but of course anyone that can view a play can understand the philosophical aesthetics of art, right? just like i can drive across a bridge and understand the concepts of physics at work

now review a film or fuck off

Only steers and queers come from Texas! And you sure as hell aren't a steer, so that narrows it down a bit doesn't it?!

it's a great movie for the first half but the second half seems to be too episodic, not coherent enough and a bit pastiche