cptgaio

Do you see how you stoop so low, because you have to slyly question whether I’ve seen this movie?

I'm not even a provocateur; there are thousands of people (and critics) who think that Trier is overrated, and they think so based on serious parameters: cinematic and moral (re-read my previous posts where my motivations are laid out), and not out of mere provocation, get that into your head.

Ps.: let me get this straight... is it normal for you to call someone an idiot for thinking this movie isn’t good?
Well, I would like to know who is really superficial and careless at this point...
I’m among those who appreciate your presence with the various fake accounts on this site, and I’ve never criticized you for the stances you’ve taken or for the fact that you often copy and paste other reviews. Indeed, I’ve always seen this as your way of lightening things up. But this time, you’re indefensible, you’ve really crossed the line. The problem is not the reason you insult someone, but the fact that you insult them, especially for reasons that, to be generous, are trivial. We’re talking about cinema, for goodness’ sake! I don’t care if we don’t share the same taste, but the fact of receiving such baseless and gratuitous attacks carries a different weight. And now don’t come to me saying it was all a joke because I would never believe that. You made a mistake. I will continue to appreciate you anyway because I usually don’t hold grudges, but surely if you admitted it, it would be nicer and you’d come out of it better.

Think about it as you wish, but you’re calling someone an idiot when you give this movie a 1, and that’s idiotic because I rated it a 1. If you want to spin it around like El Guevo and hide behind sophisms, go ahead: I never said I was offended because you don’t think like me, I said you called someone (me and others who rated it!) an idiot, and you did indeed do that. I said that El Guevo stated that I and others are talking nonsense, and he did. I like to speak clearly and not beat around the bush to prove who is better at debate. Here we have two people who HAVE OFFENDED and one who replied in kind but without offending anyone, trying to explain that a discussion shouldn’t be approached with terms like “IDIOT” or “NONSENSE.” Well, I’m not among the first two. Now, if you want to climb up the walls saying, "but the term wasn’t meant this way or that way," it’s useless rhetoric and doesn’t change the facts. Bread is bread, wine is wine... that’s all.

Welcome Back!

P.S.: If making outrageous claims means placing a 1 in Trier, then you must have a really skewed scale of values (cinematic), considering that since his debut, the good Lars has divided not only the audience but also critics (on paper) much more competent than you and me...

Alright, you use the usual trick of turning the tables.. where would I have been rude? Then if I have to be called sensitive because I defend myself against your endless accusations of saying silly things and being superficial, I gladly take it, the fact that when someone disagrees with you, you start to subtly attack them is clear as day... now if you want to talk about cinema, I'm here; if you don't consider me up to par, feel free to do without me (after all, I already have plenty of people here and even outside in real life that I enjoy doing it with), so no problem, but avoid sofismi because they don't work on me.

Certo! Inviami il testo che desideri tradurre e provvederò a farlo.

Just remove the "maybe," Poletti.

and "education"