Kubrick, Spielberg, Cheese, Spoilers, and Spam

[blessingx]

Well, since Kubrick talked of Spielberg directing...

You may mean figuratively, but...
"Spielberg responded to some of the criticisms of the film, stating that many of the "so called sentimental" elements of A.I., including the ending, were in fact Kubrick's..."

Spoiler

It's Pinocchio after all.

Thanks for ruining the movie for me. -- Dusty

[grawk]

It may or may not have been kubrick's original ending, and spielberg may or may not have written the darker parts of the film, but it remains characteristic of kubrick to have the darker elements, and characteristic of spielberg to have a schmaltzy ending. We'll never know for sure what Kubrick wanted, given that he's dead, and didn't make it himself.

Regardless of who wrote what tho, the movie had the potential for greatness, but squandered it in a schmaltzy spielberg-esque ending.

[blessingx]

Originally Posted by blessingx

Spoiler

It's Pinocchio after all.

Thanks for ruining the movie for me. -- Dusty

You gotta be killing me. We can no longer state a films origins? Is everything a spoiler now? Hell, stating its genre (if one) gives as many expectations away.

[grawk]

That's not what ruined the movie

[Dusty Chalk]

Well, not having seen the movie, I don't know -- am I over-reacting? It just seems you gave a very big hint towards how it ends.

PS I'm not saying you can't talk about it, I'm just saying don't be a lazy fuck and wrap it in spoiler tags.

[blessingx]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

Well, not having seen the movie, I don't know -- am I over-reacting? It just seems you gave a very big hint towards how it ends.

PS I'm not saying you can't talk about it, I'm just saying don't be a lazy fuck and wrap it in spoiler tags.

Well, it's difficult to confirm or deny if the ending follows the traditional X source, but I doubt the film is ruined for you.

As for being lazy, if it's not a spoiler why should it be wrapped? Honestly, how do you generate interest in films without some dialog of its background, setting, genre, directors motivations, etc.? Otherwise what? Trailer looks cool? We'd never be this protected with opera or literature. Is film that weak? I know I've said some of this before, but how do people pick films without (I know someone who refuses to read DVD covers, IMDB or reviews)? And it's all about plot switcheroos? I guarantee you I'll wrap a comment in the tag if it's something that's important to a surprise, but come on, doesn't knowing a relationship between Kurosawas Ran and King Lear a positive and not necessary to hide? Should we wrap a spoiler tag if mentioning the Cohen's No Country was based Cormac McCarthy's No Country or Three Days of the Condor based on on the novel Six Days of the Condor in case it may bother someone who read them in the past and not made the connection? In the end isn't saying a "Spielberg ending that follows the Kubrick ending" giving away more than this is a loose translation of you know what and thus not surprising ... I mean come on... it has some 'Spielberg moments'?

Honestly, if I ruined A.I. for anyone I do apologize. An old thread explained I have problems understanding where the 'spoilers' line is crossed, but I really didn't think I was anyway near it here. If I blindly stepped over, again I'm sorry and will back off the commentary.

[grawk]

I'll ruin the movie for you:

Spielberg's no Kubrick

[blessingx]

Originally Posted by grawk

I'll ruin the movie for you:
Spielberg's no Kubrick

I'll ruin something else:
Kubricks no Kubrick.

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by blessingx

As for being lazy, if it's not a spoiler why should it be wrapped? Honestly, how do you generate interest in films without some dialog of its background, setting, genre, directors motivations, etc.?

Dude, there's two different questions, and you keep interchanging them, and they're not interchangeable. Dialog is encouraged -- I'm just asking that you take a modicum of effort and wrap it in spoiler tags. That is not the same thing as discouraging interest and/or dialog about movies. If you feel it is, that is your problem.

If your sexual partner asks that a condom is used, that is not the same thing as discouraging sex. "No" would be discouraging sex.

EDIT: Over-the-top crankiness deleted, replaced with snarky analogy.

[blessingx]

First, sorry I missed the earlier crankiness. Second, you've now used 'lazy fuck' and 'modicum of effort' like the reason the tags aren't there is because I'm incapable of expending the three calories it takes to activate them. Do you really believe that? Of course if we have to wrap every single bit of information in a tag its going to discourage dialog. How can it not? It would be a pretty hidden, unnecessarily complex thread just stating titles (unless possibly too descriptive) if we had to read the minds of every other member who might create some context to assume a surprise was just revealed (which is exactly what happened - you still don't know the ending). We have to take reasonable precautions which I agree, just not that it applies here. If it does where doesn't it? That's why we're disagreeing on where the spoiler label (not if it should exist) should be used, no? I'm as surprised this is causing an uproar as if I got hit for stating Brad Pitt was in a flick and someone is upset because in their mind all the characters were female and now a romantic subplot could exist. How the hell am I suppose to anticipate that? I'm pretty confident you're the only one who feels his possible future experience has been compromised for an ending that may or may not exist. Sorry, but I doubt either of us wants every post hidden behind a button (and yes the dialog ramifications if so) and that's why the two questions are related. I don't want to beat a dead horse here so you've got the last word if you want it.

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by blessingx

Second, you've now used 'lazy fuck' and 'modicum of effort' like the reason the tags aren't there is because I'm incapable of expending the three calories it takes to activate them. Do you really believe that?

Well, since that's exactly what you're arguing about, yes. But it goes a little bit farther -- you're not willing to expend the effort to believe that others will expend the effort to read carefully, therefore you feel vindicated in being sloppy about it. I stand by my stance that you are in the wrong on that; do not feel justified.

Your analogy is flawed -- you're still stuck on believing that the problem I had was with your stating the premise, which I do not. And since I still don't know the ending -- and I do appreciate you reassuring me that I do not -- I withdraw my earlier complaint. It just seemed to me that you did. So under other circumstances I would apologize for getting on your case about that one, but jesus christ, over-react much? You get so aggressively defensive about this shit, that I feel perfectly justified in coming down on your ass about it.

So -- next time, use the fucking spoiler tags. If the thread is obviously about the movie or a TV show (the Batman leaks, tv show thread about Lost, Heroes, etc.), then by all means, feel free to discuss it openly. But in a thread where people are going to come and go like this one, use the fucking spoiler tags. Err on the side of caution. Fucker.

My only regret is not coming down on you assholes earlier when you started talking about the ending.

[deepak]

I thought the ending with the gingerbread people being his real parents was pretty damn good (though very Spielberg). Guess I was the only one

[Hopstretch]

I hated the rape scene, though.

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by deepak

I thought the ending with the gingerbread people being his real parents was pretty damn good (though very Spielberg). Guess I was the only one

That would be the Miyazaki ending.

[jinp6301]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

My only regret is not coming down on you assholes earlier when you started talking about the ending.

they said spielburg had a cheezy ending. how does that ruin anything?

[Dusty Chalk]

It tells me it has a cheesy ending. What sort of stupid question is that?

[laxx]

That's like saying xyz movie was crappy. It tells you the movie sucks.

[Dusty Chalk]

Two minor quibbles:

It's not like saying the movie is crappy, it's like saying the ending is crappy. Why is that important? Because it makes you anticipate the ending in a way that you didn't previously. If I told you that movie XYZZY had something really dramatic happen towards the end that changes the whole movie, it casts a cloud over that portion of the movie before the event. Instead of just laying back and letting the movie happen, I end up analyzing the movie from the context of how would an event towards the end change what is happening now. It kind of ruins it a little.

It really disappoints me that you guys don't understand that there's a lot of people like that -- not just me, in fact, I'm not the worst person I know. I know that there are people who have borderline aneurysms if you tell them even a little bit about the movie (one of my sisters, for example). All I did was encase a portion of someone's post in spoiler tags, and he over-reacted. If he's going to over-react, I'm going to either defend my actions, or apologize, or tell him to fuck off, or something else, or (e) some combination of the above.

You know what? Fuck all of youse -- I withdraw my apology.

[jinp6301]

haha. good old dusty!

I get what youre saying, but I still think youre going a little overboard with what considers a spoiler

[laxx]

Yea, I understand now wanting to read about a movie before you've seen it. I just feel it was kind of borderline, you can't say anything about the movie or it'll ruin it for me, type shit.

Do you get mad if someone tells you that there's one really hot scene in the movie.

Instead of him saying it was a cheesy ending, would you have put it in spoilers if he said it had an awesome ending? I don't think you would have.