I have posted my review at Suite101

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Kevin McIntyre
[B]
Just because some disagrees with you they are not flaming you.

Your insults and snide remarks are the flames.

You didn't simply disagree with me. You attacked me. And when I pointed out that people will surely be influenced by the movies they see, you attacked THEM, too.

How is it that you can be so sure God made you better than everyone else, such that all your judgements and ridicule are infallibly correct?

[Kevin McIntyre]

Seriously folk, this is obviously a deeply personal issue for Michael and more power to him. To me its more important to defend ones write of expression.

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Kevin McIntyre
...but to many it strike of Political Correctness, which accomplishes little but stifles dialog, by restricting what you can and can not say or depict.

Here you demonstrate yet more of your ignorance. Political correctness is the art of not giving offense. Nothing more. Nothing less. To be politically correct, I would have to say nothing at all.

Furthermore, pointing out that people are dying in no way forces anyone to say or depict one scene less in their movies than they wish.

I said, "Shame on you, Peter". I didn't threaten him. I didn't call for a boycott of the movie. I didn't demand that he be brought up on charges.

I merely pointed out that he was wrong to do what he did. But I respect his right to make the movie he wants to make. I didn't call him names. I didn't misrepresent what he said. I didn't attack his character. I simply said he should be ashamed of what he has done, for the tobacco use only hurts the movie and the story.

For that, I have been called assinine, accused of puerile whining, and told that whatever happened 300 years ago is more important than what we could prevent from happening tomorrow.

You have a great deal to learn about truth, logic, and the difference between right and wrong. Your childish attitude leads me to believe you probably won't learn those lessons. But I've given you more time and consideration than you have given to the people who will die because they take up the use of tobacco in the next few days.

[Kevin McIntyre]

Originally posted by Michael Martinez


Your insults and snide remarks are the flames.

You didn't simply disagree with me. You attacked me. And when I pointed out that people will surely be influenced by the movies they see, you attacked THEM, too.

How is it that you can be so sure God made you better than everyone else, such that all your judgements and ridicule are infallibly correct?

Review the posts to determine who is attacking who. I am attacking a part of your position, you are attacking me - I reference your use of the Nazi.

What is at stack here exactly?

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Kevin McIntyre
Seriously folk, this is obviously a deeply personal issue for Michael and more power to him. To me its more important to defend ones write of expression.

Kevin, the more you try to portray this as "a deeply personal issue for Michael", the sillier you look, because you obviously cannot let it go.

[Michael Martinez]

Originally posted by Kevin McIntyre
[B]

Review the posts to determine who is attacking who. I am attacking a part of your position, you are attacking me - I reference your use of the Nazi.

Which had nothing to do with you or your character.

[Ñólendil]

"There are millions problems in the world. Religous extremism, slavery, oppression, racism, sexism, child abuse. Smoking is pretty far down my list. Now if you are talking about corporate greed of which to tobacco companies are guilty (but by no means alone) then yea sure I cry bloody murder about that all the time."

--Kevin McIntyre

I'll jump in to say that religous extremism, slavery, oppression, racism, sexism and child abuse are certainly not present in the FOTR movie. Well, there is naturally Racism, but it is perceived to be a bad thing, like in the romance. But this debate arose over pipe-weed, in the FOTR movie, which is not seen in a bad light and is perceived to be a good thing in the romance. Let's try not to stray too far from movie discussion, the debate's about whether or not PJ should have included tobacco in the films, and whether or not people will be influenced by it, is it not?

...

O-kay! Reading through the rest of the thread, it appears I'm far too late! You guys haven't started spitting on eachother yet (though the insulting began a while ago), so I'm still hopeful you'll resolve (or end) the argument somehow.

I only request that the debate be more centered around the portrayal of tobacco in the film, the Fellowship of the Ring. That's what this thread is about, that's what the forum is about. Say MM is wrong and his concern is needless and his dissapointment absurd, but explain your reasoning, unless you think he's an old cracked purist with personal issues he can't let go (I don't think I need to be discreet, MM's heard it all before ) in which case, remember what Thumper's mother used to tell him.

Really, Kevin, Michael, we have serious ground-rules on Entmoot: You can strongly disagree but you can't pull hair, throw sand, or tattle-tell. Chill! Your posting on a forum with goofy faces ( )and administrators with names like Darth Tater. How mad can you really be, taking in the environment?

[Michael Martinez]

Mad? Mad? Mad ain't got nothing to do with it, assinine and puerile though it all may seem to some.

Frankly, I think the other option (mentioned in my email) was preferable to your (unintentionlly) inviting people to flame me even more (yes, I've seen it all, but that doesn't mean I want to see it all again).

[Fat middle]

i think it is better to calm down and let time pass before putting anything else in this thread. lately it has become a sort of tennis match.