Which you would think someone who watched the film would understand . . .
and yes, i did watch it, and listened to it, too .
. yeah, and i was wondering what all this innuendo about "Chinatown" meant, why was there this mythicness to it? i just didn't get it . i was asking for the insight of others, or just help if it was so obvious and i missed it .
But anyway, "I didn't think there was anything interesting about the film" may be a valid opinion, in the sense that all opinions are valid, but it doesn't leave any room for discussion. If you can't figure out a way that the movie is interesting for you, how the hell am I supposed to?
a) i never wrote that
b) as close as i came, in my two little write-ups, was "it just didn't do much for me" which i use as a starter to go into the reasons it didn't do much for me . both my
first and
second write-up avoid the problem you state while offering "room for discussion", heck, i even asked point blank (
in a separate post) "what is it you like about it?", which seems to be an opening for discussion.
c) ironically, your displeasure with non-valid responses and lack of dialogue is seemingly perfected in your responses:
. first, funny yet dismissive:
Where's that eye-rolling emoticon . . .
. second, clever yet dismissive:
Forget it skjerva, it's Chinatown.
. third, accusatory and dismissive:
You didn't actually watch the movie, did you?
. fourth, cute and dismissive:
Which you would think someone who watched the film would understand . . . Wink
. fifth, accusatory and dismissive:
But anyway, "I didn't think there was anything interesting about the film" may be a valid opinion, in the sense that all opinions are valid, but it doesn't leave any room for discussion. If you can't figure out a way that the movie is interesting for you, how the hell am I supposed to?
This kind of opinion gets expressed a lot, here and elsewhere, and I don't really know why. I guess it's interesting as an FYI, but it isn't an argument, it isn't anything anyone can reasonably be expected to respond to.
. that is the entirety of your responses, let me know what of that leaves room for discussion, or tells us
anything about the movie, much less your opinion of the movie . in my first post i claimed to not get the love for it, which actually opens space for dialogue; i note the performances of nicholson and dunnaway; and, state displeasure with the macguffins, meandering plot, and seeming meaninglessness. in my second reply i literally ask "what is it you like about it?", again, this seems to open things up for dialogue, no? my third post was playful and dismissive, i'll grant you that. my fourth post begins with the same kind of critique you discuss here - ". see, you still can't write anything about the actual film aside from something that supposes everyone should like it just because it is a film everyone is supposed to like" - the vacuousness of response. i basically reiterate the points of my first substantive post, but actually engage the film and multiple times note that i am looking for dialogue.
. very strange you would try to critique me on this point . for several reasons, don't you think?
. that said, i'd rather you respond with your thoughts on the film and why you like it than only nit-picking my response