Today's Guest Post brought to you by schpydurx:
Your site is a textbook case of hypocritical conversion disorder.
You polled for the best film of 2008 where the results were unanimous: The Dark Knight was undoubtably the worst film of 2008, even behind that colossal gem of ignorance Indiana Jones and the Skullfucking. It was the general opinion of your readers that Dark Knight was horrible waste of celluloid--so much so, that the film used to capture the festering turd is not even fit to wipe shit from their Highnesses' heinies or that Dark Knight was a torture device that violated more human rights than Bush's Nazis in
AuschwitzGuantanamo Bay. Dissenting opinions were quickly silenced like the Chinese government censoring Internet articles about Tiananmen Square. God forbid that sacred cow Skullfucking be tipped--it would amount to the treason committed by voting for John McCain.
Then we come to your best score from 2008 films. I watched the results come in this poll. Though now tied three ways for first place, the Dark Knight score was the first to receive three votes. (And no, I didn't vote for Dark Knight--you can't vote in polls if you're banned from a journal.) I find this odd for two reasons: Hans Zimmer worked on the score and it's the score to your reader's most hated movie of 2008!
I had to stop and ask myself, "How can this be?"
How can it be that the same bunch of people who claimed that their most hated film of 2008 allegedly had less intelligence than an episode of Sesame Street possibly contain the best score from 2008? After all, the whole is the sum of its parts. If the Dark Knight was as much of an assault on filmmaking as certain of your readers have made it out to be, I don't understand how it's possible that the score could have went untinkered by (what some in your audience must think anyway) that hack, Chris Nolan. After all, if Ridley Scott tinkers with his scores and he's a hack, certainly Nolan is no better. Who the hell does he think he is anyway? It's not like he's made any real films (with perhaps the exception of Memento), but I'm sure that there are some here who find that film just as pretentious as it's director.
I have pondered this for days and I'll be the first one to tell you that there's only one explanation for it: hypocritical conversion disorder.
See, even to a guy like me the only thing that makes any sense is that the same mentality that led the masses to flock to Lord and Savior Barack Obama, The Most Merciful is the same mentality shared amongst those readers who have so throughly trashed what will go down as the most revolutionary film of 2008. The majority of your readers are the cattle you so glibly refer to when discussing humanity--cud-chewing, dull-eyed, mooing, go-with-the-flow, phony-bologna, plastic banana,, good time rock n' rolling dumbasses. Skulls full of mush if you will.
The only eyebrow raiser in this whole charade is that someone didn't point out that had Dark Knight only had a better producer/director like George Lucas or a better composer like John Williams, the film could have been truly great. As it is, we had to deal with a wannabe hack who ought to be stretched out and flogged for the despicable deification known as The Dark Knight.