puntiniCAZpuntini

DeRank : 14,44 • DeAge™ : 8010 days

  • Contact
  • Here since 21 october 2003
Voto:
For me, it's not even a horror film. There's the killer, who murders people for a specific motive, there's an investigator, even if unofficial, who ultimately uncovers the murderer. It's a mystery or a thriller, with some slightly bloody murders. A "horror" film? No, I’ve never seen a “horror” film ten times. Horror is Friday the 13th, where there's the crazy maniac who kills randomly, no one can stop him, and even when he dies, he comes back because it's nonsense and should be viewed like a cartoon.
Voto:
"Are you questioning how an old lady could kill someone 30 years younger than her?" No. Absolutely not, no problem at all. It's in that way, with those details, that it becomes impossible and implausible. But still, I repeat: I don't want to compare the films, they are incomparable. I just pulled the first example of a "spectacular and plausible" murder that came to mind. And I also really like the film; if I hadn't seen it 10 times, do you think I would remember these details? And again: I’m not criticizing the film, nor Argento, I was simply responding to Pietro, who pointed out various good details about the film, and I added two terrible ones, that’s all. Can you not make a focused argument, confined within two boundaries, that can have a conclusion? I didn't want to go on for hours, just wanted to point out two flaws in an excellent film. Period, enough, no rides, no complaints, no comparisons... no, no, no. At least, not from me.
Voto:
But at least once, just once, can you read and understand what’s written? You’re truly hopeless. I’ll rewrite it for you, as usual, as always; I always have to repeat myself with you. <<< an excellent movie, but many murders don't hold up at all. >>> + <<< everything else is fabulous, I won’t argue with that, but those murders are straight out of Marvel Comics. >>> + <<< The murder of Norton in American History X >>> Got it, are you with me? I was talking about specifics, not movies. I know it’s impossible for you to engage in a discussion about something precise; you just can’t do it. But maybe we can, so just let it go; it’s not for you. I didn’t compare movies, I didn’t talk about movies, I was talking about specifics in response to Pietro, who was talking about specifics. Got it, specifics? No rides or punches in the stomach, just the actual plausibility of a murder in a film that also aims to be spectacular. That was the point, and it’s not for you, since you didn’t even understand what I was talking about… as usual, as always.
Voto:
Pietro, it may be an excellent film, but many murders don't hold up at all. An old lady can't have the strength to hold the head of someone 30 years younger underwater, especially if she doesn't brace her back with at least a knee, especially if that person has their hands on the edge. That murder is an unparalleled nonsense; if it had been Emilianko Fedor doing it, fine, but not the old lady. Just two more details and it could have worked. Not to mention the water so boiling hot it cooks a face in 40 seconds... what bullshit, it's a bathtub, not a boiler. Then I also remember that scene where a policeman is given a guided tour of all the corners of his house, and that calm guy, without putting up any resistance, makes out with the fireplace, various tables, etc., always an old lady. Then, that same old lady builds a doll that walks on its own, emits sounds, and wields a knife. But sure, right away. All that was missing was for the final murder to involve one of the protagonist's tsubos and blow him up in three seconds. Maybe the rest is fabulous; I won’t argue about that, but those murders are straight out of Marvel Comics. Norton’s murder in American History X is scarier on its own than all of Profondo Rosso, including the special features. Now that’s how you use the corners: class, imagination, practicality, optimal and quick results.
Voto:
The guitarist on this record is called Chris Nielsen. Check out Blood On The Snow as well, even though he doesn't play on it; they fill it in nicely with various keyboards (and another guitarist, of course). Ah, the second guitarist doesn’t sing.
Voto:
<< You have no idea what immense joy you have given me (and not just me) by manifesting your true self, long live sincerity! >> You’re changing the subject. YOU STILL HAVE TO find me some post where I give you the impression of asking for and wanting respect. You should at least justify 0.5% of the nonsense you’re saying. You’re going to the baker asking for a car ticket, it’s obvious that someone will respond: “damn, you’re in good shape.”
Voto:
And especially WHAT THE HELL IF YOU'RE UGLY! Damn, your profile is way too Brutal Gore. Do you want to date me?
Voto:
"See? Respect respect respect and respect." Now YOU MUST find ME A SINGLE post where I talk about respect. I have NEVER talked about respect on this site. I don't care if it's given to me, and I give it to those I consider worthy. You, being an idiot, expect to lump a thousand users into a single thought. It's impossible; that's why you don't understand. You're starting off on the wrong foot—first, ask yourself: where the hell do I publish my reviews? You need, maybe if your miserable brain allows it, to understand that each nickname corresponds to a different person. It's not just you and the rest of the world. Talk about respect with those who have talked to you about it; I haven't, nor do I believe I ever will.
Voto:
<< the perfect example of being exposed in first view on these screens, in the end the truth always comes out! >> And here’s the other idiot. Oh dumbass, this site has always allowed free denigration. I and everyone else are completely free to evaluate you as a total imbecile or perhaps a great person. And excuse me, I call you an idiot with reasons. Now let me reason your point: << highlighting the fact that for serious or not serious things they use one name and to mess around they use this name or that name,>> No, you didn’t understand (because you’re an idiot): I wrote "a name for JOKES", meaning "joking with your friends". I didn't talk about messing around (as you understand it, because you’re an idiot), because to me you really are an idiot; I’m not messing with you, I’m very serious.
Voto:
And then I'm not enlightened at all, I never said anything like that. I've just shown multiple times that you're stupid, or mentally inferior, or an imbecile, or all three. I proved it, explaining it. The fact that you're clearly below the national average doesn't mean I'm above it. Prove me wrong, I feel like laughing: coming back from vacation is never great, you know.