0
1.Why would I stop using rottentomatoes as a source when that was his intitial source....Originally Posted by BurnetRhoades
2. You still wont touch my questions, in fear of breaking your own arguement
3. You so obnoxiously quoted this: roadly, to include foreign-language (non-English) "auteur" films, independent films, experimental films, documentaries and short films. In the 1960s "art film" became a euphemism in the U.S. for racy Italian and French B-movies. By the 1970s, the term was used to describe sexually explicit European films with artistic structure such as the Swedish film I Am Curious (Yellow). In the U.S., the term "art film" is sometimes used very loosely to refer to the broad range of films shown in repertory theaters or "arthouse cinemas." With this approach, a broad range of films, such as a 1960s Hitchcock film, a 1970s experimental underground film, a European auteur film, a U.S. "Independent" film, and even a mainstream foreign-language film (with subtitles) might all fall under the rubric of "art house films.
Yet it falls under none, except the last one... which says a. Might fall under and b. loosely applied to... when anyone can tell you, this isn't an arthouse movie.
4. Notice Prince backed out... because his line of reasoning has been disproved. And he was claiming other reasons for being an arthouse.
5. In your own quote from wikipedia... I once edited Metal Maniacs wikipedia to say he was thrown into a volcano and reformed as Vader.
6. Enjoy you infraction, hopefully more people give you one, so you end up banned.
Reply With Quote
