And yet this rant of yours was so interesting to all Freepers that you needed to post it on the public forums instead of in a private FreepMail to me, right?
I suspect I have been on a hellavu lot more movie sets than you. I know that levity goes on in the most pious of situations. So whateth?
Good for you, but irrelevant to my post.
My points were simple. This blooper reel does not exist. The writer made it up. The jokes the writer used were not particulary fresh or funny
Again, good for you. Here's a cookie. Again, though, I didn't take any issue with your opinions on those matters.
--or even plausible.
And *that's* where I take issue with your posts. Not so much your conclusion itself, but with the condescending, insulting way in which you characterized those Freepers who came to a different conclusion on that point, as if the matter were so thoroughly unarguable that anyone who disagreed with you was perforce an idiot.
Your posts asserted that people who gave any consideration to the notion that such happenings on the set might at least be plausible were, in your words, "really so dense", and that "it does tell you something about some of the critical thinking that goes on here. Sadly", and that "too many" people were willing to consider it at face value.
On *that* point of yours, I felt it was worth replying to you in a post containing specific *actual* examples from the filming, making the counterpoint that the blogger's piece wasn't much different from *real* mishaps and quips from the set, and therefore it may be inappropriate for you (and others) to ridicule other posters who considered such events to be at least plausible.
The defensiveness (and vitriol) of your response indicates that perhaps I struck a nerve.
But PLEASE DO GO ON BEATING YOUR CHEST about how you aren't offended by this and therefore no one else should ever be.
That's not what I said, now, is it? Nor was I "BEATING MY CHEST" by adding some facts to the thread (i.e. the quotes from Caviezel). Reading comprehension is your friend. So is civility. You, on the other hand, appeared to be "BEATING YOUR CHEST", unquote, by sneering at the lack of "critical thinking" by posters who arrived at a different conclusion than yourself, who were "so dense" that you found it "sad".
It is so INTERESTING!
And I'm still waiting for the clarification I asked for in post #177.