All or Nothing

Michelle Howard2 said:Look, I haven't actually seen the movie yet; I’m just reading this thread as a completely neutral observer. redowl90 gave some really solid reasons for why he doesn't think it's a masterpiece—he actually had plenty of nice things to say, but he just didn't fall head over heels for it, which is fair. What you wrote, driftingowl27, comes off a bit fanatical. That's fine, but it isn't okay to aggressively force your opinion on everyone else. This is a space where people should feel free to talk about cinema, and thank God people see movies differently than I do. redowl90 certainly isn't an idiot, so there's no need to treat him that way. Besides, since you're a moderator, please don't discourage people by talking down to them. Instead of being condescending, try something like, "Mr. redowl90, I respectfully disagree, and here is why I believe this film is a masterpiece." Share what you know, show us what you saw, and actually enrich the conversation. Everything you've posted so far has been empty. At least redowl90 offered some actual insight, whereas you've just thrown out two meaningless phrases.

Huh... It’s actually pretty fantastic to read something like this from someone I don't even know... Thank you... 😉

redowl90, instead of sending this via email, I’m just gonna drop the reply right here on the Forum. Wouldn't want one of our fellow moderators accusing us of sabotaging the discussions, right?

driftingowl27 said:redowl90, let's just stick to replying here instead of via email. I don't want our moderator accusing us of trying to derail the discussion.

Haha, fair enough. Whatever works for you... I don't mind at all.

Michelle Howard2, should I jump in? 😕 😁

Alright, fine. Look, it’s not even about me going to see a White film as a cinematic experience; it’s more that I’m targeting his specific way of writing about movies—which is mostly just being condescending without actually having any substance behind it (sounds familiar, Michelle Howard?). Just to prove I’m not just talking nonsense, let's look at some quotes White just dropped on the Forum:

Here’s one regarding his "excellent" understanding of film:

I don't get why the guy filled the script with so many characters, only to focus on two leads at the end and completely forget the rest...

Well, since you're already spitting venom about something you clearly don't understand, let me try to explain it to you in the most patronizingly simple way possible. Just because you failed to see the character development doesn't mean Mike Leigh messed up; it means you missed the fact that EVERY single character shares the same cohesive thread—a thread you obviously missed, along with the entire point of the movie.

Moving on to his mastery of film theory and practice:

The movie depicts the absolute worst misery of New York City, yet it's full of humor... Give me a break... When will people realize that if they want to make a Psychedelic, depressing film, there CANNOT be any humor in it?

Every single word in that sentence is completely brainless.

1. The film doesn't depict the "worst misery" of New York; it's just set in a working-class neighborhood. Unlike Ken Loach, Leigh doesn't try to squeeze political points out of the setting. He just emphasizes that we're looking at ordinary people.

2. Go look up the definition of "Psychedelic" in a dictionary and then come back here and try to apply it to this film.

3. Your claim that the film is depressing probably says more about your own mental state than the movie itself, considering the film has a more-than-positive point that—oh yeah—you didn't even catch.

4. Humor is allowed in any film, because humor is one of the most natural things about the human race, and people are (usually) the ones telling the stories in movies.

And finally, we have this general gem that I’d call "Giving movies ratings based on how much I want to feel smart":

Yeah, damn, 8 1/2 is a Felliniesque film, what an error... I'm not used to people from Europe making good movies.

Give yourself a reality check, man. You look incredibly clueless when you have the nerve to give ratings or organize "Film of the Year" lists and whatever else after outbursts as nonsensical as that... Did you just pick those opinions up on Google?

Let me give you a friendly tip: Michelle Howard has some unread books that might actually be useful to you. Maybe read them and then summarize them for him so the three of us can actually have a killer discussion. What do you say to that?

One of the things I hate most is when someone says, "You just didn't get the movie..." or "You missed the point..."

When will people finally realize that everyone interprets a film differently? You saw a bright message at the end, and now you think I missed it... That’s not true. I understood that the film actually has an optimistic ending; my issue is that it was poorly executed. That long scene felt tedious to me, and because of its length, it just didn't fit the flow of the rest of the film, where everything else had, if nothing else, a normal runtime. It clearly bugs you enough that you're immediately getting defensive...

And now I could tell you that you're being pretty dense if you didn't realize this movie depicts the absolute worst poverty in New York City, because it really does... For crying out loud, the guy is begging his daughter and wife for spare change just to pay for the radio, and even then, it's not enough. Everyone lives in those kinds of housing projects. One of the characters is such a massive alcoholic cliché—it’s tired, especially when that guy has a heart attack and says the dumbest line in the whole movie: "Are you crying?" and then some idiots in the theater around me start laughing... Give me a break, you think that's a good ending?... Every single character is struggling, and no matter how you look at it, those problems are all tied to financial hardship, which is why I say it's pure misery. Honestly, compared to the people in this movie, I'm living like a king...

Heh, as for my take on 8 1/2, that was a mistake and I admitted it right away. Everyone makes mistakes occasionally... But apparently, when I mess up, people take it way more seriously than when anyone else does...

Besides, Mickey, you should be acting like a moderator here and making sure people stay on topic. Look at what you're doing: getting sucked into trivial arguments and insulting people, and then somehow you're the one coming off as the bad guy instead of anyone else... To be honest, you seemed like a normal person in some of your other posts, not like this. I guess first impressions can be deceiving...

And what's wrong with my writing style? It's perfectly straightforward, without using all these ambiguous words. You know exactly what I think about a film, its flaws, and its strengths right from the start. Seriously, just look at some of the other posts on here; some people are so pretentious when they "criticize" movies that it makes me sick to read them...

Alright redowl90, end of discussion. It’s just pointless at this point...

driftingowl27 said:Look, let me give you a little friendly advice—Michelle Howard2 actually has some unread books lying around that might be right up your alley, and once you've chewed through them, you could give us the rundown so the three of us can get together for one killer discussion. What do you think?

Count me out. Honestly, discussions with you, driftingowl27, tend to be nothing short of lethally boring. 👋

Michelle Howard2 said:Not a chance. Talking shop with you, Mickey, is enough to put anyone into a coma. 👋

Look, Michelle Howard2, why don't you just sit back, watch "All or Nothing," and then have a little chat about it with White? Leave me out of it. Honestly, I have a feeling you two are both operating on the exact same level of film knowledge. 👋

Mickey, honestly, with the way you dissect movies and how much you actually know about cinema, I don't even need to watch the damn thing to get the gist. And even if I did sit through it, I’d still be totally outclassed by you.

Michelle Howard2 said:Even without that, I’d still be more coherent than you.

Well, you’ve had plenty of chances to prove that. Here’s a link for the casual observers out there:

Coherent Michelle Howard2 doesn't want to waste her breath arguing with incoherent Mickey

Come on, cheer me up with something new, please🙂

Mickey, seriously, don't go digging yourself an even deeper hole here. Look, it’s just that on this specific thread, you really came across as totally clueless—just shallow, dense, and acting like some bigshot when you clearly aren't. It was like watching someone try to read a map upside down; you need everything spelled out twice just to grasp the basics, and honestly, you're still missing the point...

Man, we’re basically acting like moderators ourselves here. But seriously, who's gonna moderate us!? Liberatore is probably already catching a flight back to the States right about now. (We were grabbing coffee yesterday and had such a killer conversation about cinema.) Mickey, I’ve got this nagging feeling you aren't actually this much of a chatterbox in real life. Please tell me I'm wrong.

Just a quick heads-up, we're keeping this thread focused on "All or Nothing"

First off, let me get back at you:

The only thing proven in that thread is that you’re an absolute pro at sucking your own thumb. You clearly have zero clue what the terms you're throwing around actually mean, you're failing miserably at trying to insinuate things that aren't even there, and when someone finally calls your bluff using your own damn words, you just play the wounded prima donna.

As for the moderation situation, we don't really have a choice but to bring someone else in to moderate us. What should we ask the admin? 🙂

If you want to know about my real-life persona, go ahead and ask Mantra or Lucu. But as for yours? I really hope you don't hold any positions of responsibility, because it’s painfully obvious how much you struggle when someone actually knows more than you about the things you think make you special. It's a shame, really—I truly hope this doesn't derail your career, whether you're talking about film or business.

redowl90 said:What did I even say today that made me sound so clueless? I said All or Nothing is a solid movie until about twenty minutes before the end... Look, that’s just my take on it. I also said the acting in Y Tu Mama Tambien wasn't anything special... And it WASN'T! You guys who obsess over European films don't watch them objectively; you just care that they aren't the typical Hollywood trash or other propaganda garbage...

Well, we can't look at movies that way... Every film should be judged on its own merits, regardless of who directed it or what language is spoken...

God knows what would happen if I shared my actual thoughts on, say, Amelie... I'd probably get banned from the Forum for life...

Honestly, redowl90, you don't actually know anything about cinema, you're just acting like a snob... You wouldn't even know the difference between Bergman and Fellini... plus, Y Tu Mama Tambien isn't even a European film, it's Latin American... and remember when you said you saw "Whispers and Cries" at the Film Archive and called it a boring movie... well, you also said a film won't be bad just because people like boring movies... I remember that clearly... but then you heard how "cool" it is to love Bergman, and suddenly you've changed your tune...

I don't obsess over EUROPEAN FILMS, I obsess over GOOD FILMS.... whether they were made by Canadian Egojan, American Jarmusch, Iranian Kiarostami, Japanese Kitano, or European Leigh...

I don't judge a movie based on the director... I actually hated Loach's latest, "Sweet 16"...

Y Tu Mama Tambien is a thousand times better than that awful Titanic, the movie you're obsessed with...🙄

Michelle Howard2 said:Mickey, man, take a breath. Stop insulting people for no reason and quit acting like you're the world's leading professor. Honestly, it’s exhausting.

Look, I haven't even seen the movie yet; I'm just reading this thread as an unbiased observer. redowl90 actually gave a solid explanation of why he doesn't think it's a masterpiece—he even included plenty of praise—but he didn't go overboard or lose his mind over it like you did. What you wrote feels a bit fanatical, which is fine, but being that aggressive about forcing your opinion on everyone else isn't okay. This is a space where people should feel free to talk about movies, and thank God they see things differently than I do. redowl90 certainly isn't some idiot you need to lecture. Besides, since you're a moderator here, don't discourage people by talking down to them. Instead of attacking, try something like, "Actually, redowl90, I disagree, and here's why I think this is a masterpiece." Share what you know, show us what you saw, and actually enrich the conversation. Everything you wrote about the film was empty. At least redowl90 said something substantive, whereas you just dropped two meaningless phrases. To anyone watching from the outside, you just look like someone throwing shade without any actual arguments.

Michelle Howard2, it's pretty obvious you haven't been following redowl90's posts... nobody evaluates films with that level of pretentiousness like he does... it's like he's writing for fucking Les Temps modernes... but the truth is... the kid just has zero clue about cinema!!!!
When guys like Liberatore, Newcomer, Zhabotinsky, or Mickey have an opinion, it's one thing... but when someone like him starts trashing Leigh with that much ego, while trying to hype up the supposed "artistry" in Titanic... it honestly makes my skin crawl...
redowl90 once went after me ages ago just because I argued that Bertolucciesque's "Stealing Beauty" was a total lemon of a movie... 🙄 so clearly, he isn't immune to backlash himself if someone dares to criticize his absolute favorite film...

2. Grab a dictionary, look up what the word "Psychedelic" actually means, and then come back here and try applying it to the movie properly.

You're spot on, redowl90... you're acting just like those guys on the right wing over at the political rallies... you hear a fancy word and think using it makes you sound educated, so you throw it around constantly without even knowing what it signifies...🙄

Go watch Barberell if you want to see what a truly Psychedelic film
looks like.

Yeah, seriously, 8 1/2 is totally Fellini's masterpiece. What a massive mistake... I guess I'm just not used to seeing someone from Europe make actually good movies.

From what I can tell, you credited 8 1/2 to Bergman (that Swede) instead of some American... so I'm really not following the logic behind your comment above.😕 🙄I mean, please tell me you didn't think Bergman was an American...😲 😲

[When will people finally realize that everyone interprets a movie differently? You saw a bright message at the end and now you think I’m missing it... That’s just not true... I get that the movie has an optimistic ending, but my issue is that it was poorly executed... That long scene felt incredibly tedious to me, and because it dragged on so much, it felt totally out of place compared to the rest of the film, where everything else had a more natural pace... It clearly gets under your skin since you're getting so defensive about it.

Right...🙄 what do all those big-shot film critics actually know? 🙄 These people who act like they're experts after studying cinema for years... actually ranked "All or Nothing" as one of the top 10 films of 2002.
Honestly, we should all just go take lessons from White... Since White says the ending of "All or nothing" is bad... then I guess that's just how it is... because clearly, none of us or the critics know anything about movies... apparently, White knows best...🙄 🙂

interesting debate😳

Look, I’ve gotta agree that everyone sees a movie differently. There’s no such thing as one "correct" interpretation. Sure, maybe 90% of the critics say a movie is white, but that doesn't mean I'm wrong just because I see it as black. Those same critics will be at each other's throats over the next flick, split 50/50 on whether it's good or not. It's all just pure coincidence—basically just whether the critics happen to vibe with the director's style. It's probability, plain and simple...
Once a film is finished, the director loses control. No more whining about "you guys just didn't get it!!" If a director or writer really wanted people to see things exactly their way, they should've just made it that way... okay, I'm rambling, this isn't even the main point but whatever, had to get it off my chest. 😁

Yeah, the Americans embraced it pretty well. I think there were five nominations if I recall correctly—Mike Leigh for screenplay and direction, and I believe Best Picture too.

p.s. I’m a huge fan of Lemonade! 😁😈