Disney Duster wrote:
"I wanted him to, why didn't he?" is completely incorrect.
You're rewriting your posts again. Pretty much everything we've discussed here has rested on the simple fact that you thought
Coco is emotional, but Luke's review makes no mention of emotion, and you clearly felt it should.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
What's up with your emotional heart, dude?
Indeed this is about me wondering what is going on.
And it begins your "Luke doesn't care about emotion" thread that you've inferred throughout the next several posts. By your questioning about it at all, you basically imply that you feel he doesn't have the emotional capacity that you want him to have.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
he said it was not up to the heights of Pixar's best and he seemed to prefer humor and thrills over emotion.
A statement.
No, an inference ("he seemed to prefer..."), and the first of many that you confuse as fact.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
I guess I never thought everything Luke write must be personal preference.
A realization.
One which you still don't understand.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
But I find it weird he never mentions Coco's emotional level.
Me wondering again. If you want to call it confused, I
guess you could, but it wasn't about what you sounded like you thought I was confused
about.
Because over the past few responses in this thread, you have been inconsistent in your claims about emotion, Luke, and writing about it in reviews (
Coco or otherwise). Either you're wondering why he doesn't write about it, you use your confirmation bias to state that he prefers other things to emotion, then you say that he outright neglects it entirely. This is simply the beginning of it, because you fixate specifically on why, out of all the films, Luke doesn't talk about emotion in one film you want him to talk about emotion.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
What you quoted totally says to me he prefers humor and thrills over emotion
A statement on what the evidence says to me.
You're basically confirming your confirmation bias which was informed by your inference of his review.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
If that's not what he's saying ok, then I'm wrong
A statement which points to me not having confirmation bias, and in relation to the rest of what I have written, it says, "I might be wrong about Luke preferring humor and thrills to emotion, but I don't think I am because of such and such evidence." That should not be confusing to someone.
Your attempted rebuttal just shows your confirmation bias. "I might be wrong [...] but I don't think I am." That's how someone with confirmation bias thinks. They can see all the evidence in the world in front of them, but interpret it solely to mean what they want it to mean. You are altering facts to fit your views rather than considering altering your views to fit the facts.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
Are you using what I say as evidence? Just like what I am doing with what he says?
Yeah, this again should not be confusing.
You're trying to turn confirmation bias back on me when all I've done is taken the facts of the review and of your statements and shown them for what they are. That's the confusion, because you don't fully understand confirmation bias.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
it is fact, not opinion.
Or this.
It is confusion because you are known on this forum for presenting your opinion as fact.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
I think he is bypassing the emotion altogether.
Or this. He didn't talk about the emotion at all. He may appreciate emotion, but he
skipped over it in his review of Coco.
And therein is the confusion. You hinge so much on that he didn't talk about emotion that your questioning of why has been muddled, again traveling from the point of "he doesn't talk about it" to "he doesn't prefer it" to "he ignores emotion completely."
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
I am still bothered by Luke skipping over the emotion of the film and sounding like humor and thrills are what mattered to make a film one of Pixar's best. If I'm wrong, I'd really like to know.
Where is the confusion here?
As if you'd ever accept that you're wrong about your confirmation bias.
Disney Duster wrote:
In This Thread, Disney Duster wrote:
I know Luke appreciates emotion, I just didn't like what he said in this particular review and what I felt he was saying that I was to gather from his words.
Yes, I acknowledge the
Luke appreciates emotion, but I didn't like what he said,
and I didn't like that he seemed to be saying emotion doesn't matter as much as humor or thrills or even that he may be suggesting the film has no emotion as he makes
no mention of it!
So basically, the "I wanted him to, why didn't he?" that you said was incorrect.
Disney Duster wrote:
In addition, I took a look at Luke's review of The Lego Batman Movie and it points to him appreicating emotion, but then he talks about the film succeeding because of wit, humor, and excitement and not emotion and so, I'm still left wondering...
If you're going to play that game, then just go through every single review of his and cite when he talks about emotion.
You've laid claim that he doesn't consider the emotion of a Pixar film when compared to all their works, so why not widen the scope and go through all sixteen years of his reviews if you're suddenly going to throw in
The Lego Batman Movie into the mix.
I'm fed up with this thread because you keep going in circles on what you want, what you say you want, what you think I'm saying, and what you interpret in order to support what you think you said earlier. If there's a response to this, I'm ignoring it because life is too short to argue with you.
Albert