|
|
Post by london777 on Apr 22, 2017 22:18:14 GMT
Tomorrow the guy who has way more writing credits in IMDb than any other (1258 at last check) celebrates his birthday.
There is still time to send me a small donation by PayPal. If you all chip in, I can buy a cake from the members of IMDB v2.0
|
|
|
|
Post by Richard Kimble on Apr 22, 2017 22:24:56 GMT
Tomorrow the guy who has way more writing credits in IMDb than any other (1258 at last check) celebrates his birthday. yet another actor turned writer |
|
|
|
Post by nausea on Apr 23, 2017 15:15:11 GMT
What this dude is doing, Is like me making a video about a shirt.
|
|
|
|
Post by london777 on Apr 23, 2017 17:31:14 GMT
Tomorrow the guy who has way more writing credits in IMDb than any other (1258 at last check) celebrates his birthday. There is still time to send me a small donation by PayPal. If you all chip in, I can buy a cake from the members of IMDB v2.0 I can't believe it took me til today to figure out who you were talking about! I just created a thread about his birthday, asking for favorite film versions of his works. Sorry I didn't understand your very clever post before. I saw you upstaged me by starting your own thread. Just like you Yanks did to Thorold Dickinson's "Gaslight" (1940). Though I suppose you would have needed to delete my thread to complete the analogy. It was a puzzle post, though whether eliciting surprise or suspense only one man here can tell us. Clever it may have been, but not clever enough to have improved my financial standing as I had hoped. |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Apr 23, 2017 17:56:18 GMT
I can't believe it took me til today to figure out who you were talking about! I just created a thread about his birthday, asking for favorite film versions of his works. Sorry I didn't understand your very clever post before. I saw you upstaged me by starting your own thread. Just like you Yanks did to Thorold Dickinson's "Gaslight" (1940). Though I suppose you would have needed to delete my thread to complete the analogy. It was a puzzle post, though whether eliciting surprise or suspense only one man here can tell us.
Clever it may have been, but not clever enough to have improved my financial standing as I had hoped. Because london777 has as yet not responded as he said he would, that one man is going to sit out on this attempt at provocation. EDIT: london777 still hasn't, as of Apr. 28, 2017. A week and a day. I'm still waiting. Now that's a puzzle, certainly, though whether it will be solved in a mixture of surprise and inevitability I may never know. |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Apr 23, 2017 21:47:13 GMT
I saw you upstaged me by starting your own thread. Just like you Yanks did to Thorold Dickinson's "Gaslight" (1940). Though I suppose you would have needed to delete my thread to complete the analogy. It was a puzzle post, though whether eliciting surprise or suspense only one man here can tell us. Clever it may have been, but not clever enough to have improved my financial standing as I had hoped. My humblest apologies! And sorry about your financial standing. But, dinosaur that I am, I do nothing financial on-line.  Anyway, I am sorry to have upstaged you. But it took my doing that for me to finally understand what your thread was about. What a dunce! I guess it just goes to show that I'm no good at puzzle posts. Y'know, the irony is that I'm not actually all that good at solving puzzle plots either. (I was similarly befuddled by this thread--and I adore Shakespeare, too!--until I saw your post.) I've met people who have read a particularly good puzzle-plot novel and said, "Oh, that's obvious," and then listed all the clues that I missed. So, I think, an ability to "solve" them, or lack thereof, does not imply a liking for them, or lack thereof either. I think the only criterion for liking the puzzle-plot is finding satisfaction in anagnorisis. Not to hijack this thread by continuing my theorizing from the "Billy Wilder" one, but I just wanted to clarify! |
|
|
|
Post by Salzmank on Apr 23, 2017 22:49:40 GMT
Y'know, the irony is that I'm not actually all that good at solving puzzle plots either. (I was similarly befuddled by this thread--and I adore Shakespeare, too!--until I saw your post.) I've met people who have read a particularly good puzzle-plot novel and said, "Oh, that's obvious," and then listed all the clues that I missed. So, I think, an ability to "solve" them, or lack thereof, does not imply a liking for them, or lack thereof either. I think the only criterion for liking the puzzle-plot is finding satisfaction in anagnorisis. Not to hijack this thread by continuing my theorizing from the "Billy Wilder" one, but I just wanted to clarify! Love the concept of anagnorisis. A powerful tool in dramatic creation - mysteries and plot twists in particular. Perfect for your puzzle-plot thread, though I am one who probably enjoys the experience of viewing more than I do analyzing the process of creating such things. Inevitability is the real secret. That's why I hate so much of the crap that's done today with totally meaningless plot twists and non-linear constructions designed entirely to trick the audience into believing they are receiving something substantial when all they're getting is nonsense. But I digress from the great man, Bill. . . That's my fault--sorry--but I do have to say, though london777 may mock me for it, that the great man himself was inspired by Aristotelian anagnorisis. In particular, I recently saw references to two prominent examples in Macbeth (the explanation of Macduff's ability to kill Macbeth) and Othello (the revelation of Iago's treachery). |
|
Anyway, I am sorry to have upstaged you. But it took my doing that for me to finally understand what your thread was about. What a dunce! I guess it just goes to show that I'm no good at puzzle posts.