[ SECRET POST #2319 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2319 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.
[The Slum Cat - Ernest Seton Thompson]


__________________________________________________



03.
[Mass Effect]


__________________________________________________



04.
[The Hunger Games]


__________________________________________________



05.
[Ib]


__________________________________________________



06.
[Family Guy]


__________________________________________________



07.
[The West Wing]


__________________________________________________



08.
[Labyrinth]


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 01 pages, 016 secrets from Secret Submission Post #331.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

Wow. I think this might take the cake for most backhanded and passive aggressive snobby comment that has no relevance to the conversation whatsoever in FS history.

Also, you do understand the concept of different genres, right? Like, a superhero movie would be just as sucky taking place in one room as 12 Angry Men would be if it had explosions in it? You get that, right?

[anonymouslyyours]

What? ...you're missing the point and you're wrong about missing the point. O.o

[(Anonymous)]

Did they or did they not praise a movie by randomly insulting another one even though no one was even comparing the two?

If they were, I assure you I wasn't missing the point.

[anonymouslyyours]

They said they would really like to see this crossover and then bolstered that by saying how much they enjoy movies centered on acting, tension, and characterization. They then implied they would have enjoyed Avengers more if it was more story-driven.

You're the one who decided that mean they were dissing an entire genre. You're the one implying superhero movies can only be explosion fests devoid of acting, tension, and characterization.

[(Anonymous)]

Except that's not what I said even remotely. I said that they crapped on a random movie, one that had nothing to do with 12 Angry Men, just to bolster their opinion.

That's rubbish. That just makes them look like they just want an excuse to dump on a movie they don't like by making unrealistic demands of it - those unrealistic demands being "having no explosions," because I DO NOT believe The Avengers, or the superhero genre, is devoid of "acting, tension, and characterization" and I deeply resent snobs like iceyred who think that the presence of explosions and some cheesiness = the absence of "acting, tension, and characterization."

[anonymouslyyours]

Holy cow your standards for "dumping" on a movie are ridiculously low. All I saw was iceyred favoring one kind of story-telling over another. There isn't even a direct insult in the original comment. They didn't even say there's a lack of acting, tension, and characterization, just that that's how they prefer to have the plot moved forward without any other devices the Avengers did use.

All I saw was someone kind of saying they like something better than something else and would be curious to see how telling that story in a way they prefer would play out. Then you made it about genres and snobbery.

I would also like to apologize to iceyred for my incoherent white-knighting. I probably did not help like, at all.

[(Anonymous)]

I didn't make it out about genres. I mentioned genres, but the point was that um, no, honey, you must be seriously deluded if you think iceyred wasn't trashing the Avengers or wasn't implying there was a lack of acting/tension/characterization there. They were. The most basic logical reading of their comment is that they were. Now, maybe it was just a poorly-written comment, but where are you getting that they were remotely "curious" about seeing the Avengers played out like 12 Angry Men? Where are you getting that they thought the Avengers was good but they personally preferred something else? Where are you getting this "plot moving forward" stuff from? They said they liked the movie because of it's acting, tension, and characterization, and said that instead of that, the Avengers had bad dialogue and explosions. Unless you are iceyred, or are telepathic, I don't know where you're getting this information form, because you sure as hell aren't getting it from the comment.

Also? Praising a movie by dumping on an unrelated movie is foul. It's cheap, it's cheating, it's whiny it discredits the movie you're praising to people who have never seen it, because it looks like you can only praise it by insulting another movie. And it discredits you, because you look like a venomous person who likes to randomly insult movies uninvited. I'd think that iceyred was out of line even if they were trashing Transformers 2 or another movie I hated in praise of 12 Angry Men, because the very practice of praise-by-random-insult is incredibly cheap and kinda gross.

Huh, and I don't even love Avengers. I just liked it. That probably says something.

[anonymouslyyours]

Honestly I am really not able to have this argument rn and what the hell do I know but I totally read the second paragraph of that comment as iceyred discussing why they would like to see a 12 Angry Men/Avengers crossover. They like that 12AM relied more on those than the visual action and bantering dialogue the Avengers did use. Yes it seems apparent Iceyred isn't really down for the kind of movie Avengers is but at no point did it seem like they were getting snobby and passive-agressive and whatever else you accused them of. And okay maybe we had different readings of the word "instead". I didn't take it to mean that they were accusing the Avengers of having NO acting, tension, and characterization. Just not focused enough for their liking.

I think it was really just the tone of your comment that caught my attention because I actually kind of don't care about this argument. You just went batshit on a comment that seems relatively harmless and doesn't actually contain anything you're accusing it of or whatever.

[iceyred]

Avengers was ok, although the 'red in my ledger scene' drove me up a wall. The movie didn't make a huge impression on me overall (except for Bruce Banner scenes). What I said about 12 Angry Men was in praise of 12 Angry Men. There are plenty of movies with frustrating dialogue that I could have referenced. I chose the Avengers because it had recently been men and it was fresh in my mind. Maybe my comment was poorly written. My bad.

Also, they are movies. Even if I had been dissing Avengers, that would not make me the worst waste of carbon to walk the face of God's good green earth. It's not that big of a deal.

[iceyred]

You're good. I actually forgot I commented on this secret until I came back to the first page and saw the conversation. Whoops.

[(Anonymous)]

DA

Not sure about the rest of it, but there was a reason for mentioning Avengers specifically. The comment iceyred was responding to posited a '12 angry men' jury formed of twelve Bruce Banners, so she was talking about 12 Angry Men in the context of a crossover with Avengers. So comparing the two movies is sort of justified under the circumstances, or at least not coming from nowhere?