jenksdaniel, I used to work downtown, at quitting time many of us would line up on the street at one of the bus stops to catch our ride home. As we stood there for the 10 or 15 minutes at times someone would come along, often with a Bible in his or her hand, and preach to us, essentially a captive audience. We had no choice, we had to stand there to catch our bus. It wasn't that they were saying anything bad, they were repeating what most of us believe anyway and hear on Sunday, it was just an unwanted intrusion.
So is this essentially what you are doing? You see TV and movies as essentially evil influences and you come to these boards, where you know you'll find TV and movie fans, so that you can preach to us of the evils of TV and movies? And, you may even be right, but I would think your approach, your technique, is more likely to alienate more people than people will convert to your way of thinking.
Is that how you view yourself? A preacher of sorts who comes to these boards to convert people, to have them give up TV and movies?
If so that is like going to a big football game and standing at the 50-yard line at halftime with a megaphone and yelling to everyone, "Football is evil, go home and play with your kids in the yard, professional football is just big business and it does much harm and very little good."
Imagine what kind of reception you would get there, and it is pretty much the reception you get here. Studios aren't out to corrupt people any more than pro football is out to tear up the family unit. In each case the industry is just responding to what the fans want.
..*.. TxMike ..*..
Make a choice, to take a chance, to make a difference.
reply
share
jenkinsdaniel
9 years ago
I'm afraid you've got it backwards. I'm only doing two things.
1. I'm trying to communicate the information regarding the synchronized and unlikely similarities between 1982 and 1993 that point toward the importance of Poltergeist's ending. This is one of two places that I have communicated that information because this is a discussion board...for the movie Poltergeist. So it only makes sense that I communicate that information here...at the discussion board...for the movie Poltergeist.
2. I'm responding to questions and responses that originally came from my posts about those synchronized and unlikely similarities between 1982 and 1993 that point toward the importance of Poltergeist's ending. I have also responded to the fact that I was censored several days ago, which is relevant to mention in some of my responses. Mentioning what happened with the censors is different than complaining about them, which I haven't done since they've stopped censoring me.
There is nothing intrusive about me doing those two things, here...at the discussion board for Poltergeist...with its important ending. You are forgetting that nobody has forced anyone to read what I have written. You have come here on your own behalf and in your own freedom. Apparently, what I have to say has captivated a significant amount of people here. I guess they weren't expecting me to be able to defend my sensational statements about the synchronized and unlikely similarities between 1982 and 1993 that point toward the importance of Poltergeist's ending.
"The industry is just responding to what the fans want." --if that's true, they would have flooded the market with religious content soon after 2004. I saw what they did instead. I have inside information on them. I know what they're about. They won't be getting any of my money.
reply
share
ALMAmatters
9 years ago
They did. In 2005 we had Capote, Munich, Brokeback Mountain, Crash, Cinderella Man and many other fine films.
The won't be getting any of your money? I think the industry will survive without you. Take care big spender.
reply
share
jenkinsdaniel
9 years ago
I guess you failed to notice the Best Picture nominee box office slump that occurred after 2004. So they had to add the number of Best Picture nominees to more than five in 2009. But still, the Best Picture winners are in the longest box office slump in its history.
reply
share
ALMAmatters
9 years ago
Son, you are not just obnoxious, you are a G-D Damn idiot! In the 1930's and 1940's the number of Best Picture nominees then were 10-12 pictures nominated every year. Yes they raised that number to 10 in 2009 after being set at 5 for a ridiculous amount of years after originally lowering from 10-12 in the 30's and 40's.
Why not? It was long overdue. Heck little Jenkins even you can cipher that there is almost three times the amount of movies (or more) released each year. And in the last few years the movies released after 2004 set box office records in receipts that even inflation adjusted demolish records set 2004 and prior.
Box office slump? Son did it ever occur to your pea brain that the slight down tick in theater goer receipts is directly correlated to the increase in DVD & Blue Ray sales, rentals and online streaming. This newest market channel just adds to the movie industry's bottom line even more.
Now jerk off, what in the heck does any of your false statements like you made above had to do with mocking God or The all world important 45 astonishing (LOL)similarities between Poltergeist and Schindler's List that forebode events of epic proportions. No need to answer because there is no answer. Also no need to answer because I will never see it because you have now been added to my ignore list. You make no sense, offer no logic and distort and lie about facts for what reason I can not fathom or anyone with a brain could. You never "win" any arguments because their are no arguments to "win". You present no position or make no coherent points to form the basis of a conclusion that could neither be defended, supported or rationalized, let alone argue.
Have a nice life you nut! Poof! Vanish! Ignore!
reply
share
jenkinsdaniel
9 years ago
I have yet to make any false statements. I said once that the percentage of what's good on TV is very low compared to what's bad on TV, when I should have said that I'm sure that the percentage of what's good on TV is very low compared to what's bad on TV. Or something like that. That's the only misstatement that I've made so far. But it wasn't a false statement. ALMAmatters' latest message is filled with false statements about me in one paragraph. ALMAmatters failed to pinpoint one false statement of mine without misquoting me.
It astonishes me to see so many here not reading very carefully what I wrote. ALMAmatters went on and on and on about my false statement about a box office slump. ALMAmatters failed to notice that I had written "Best Picture nominee box office slump" and "Best Picture winner box office slump", not just "box office slump".
I'll respond more to ALMAmatters' latest message in a different message because the width of the lines is getting too short.
reply
share