You are correct up until this point.




QFT - - before you wise up and delete this shortsighted nonsense - - allegory anyone?.

Many people have others' opinions. I am glad you have your own, even if it is wrong.


Of course opinions can be wrong: they can be inconsistent with facts, and whenever that is the case, we use the word 'wrong' to assess this relation between one's belief and the world's facts.


The women in Picasso's paintings don't even look real!

An opinion can only be wrong if presented as fact, but standalone, you cannot say someone is wrong due to their opinion.

I did not do that, but I guess Bradley cannot see it and neither can you.

B+, enjoyable, but missed a bit of storytelling at the end, something I found very catchy in Princess Mononoke, and Spirit Away, but my overall impression is pretty good about this film, better than other Ghibli movies

For the record, I don't believe that BK is actually a cretin. He's just writing like one. It appears he's currently suffering from a crippling case of literalmindedness, from which I pray he makes a speedy recovery.

I suggest he take three fables daily, and if his symptoms worsen, he should be sure to visit his Family Doctor Poet.

Get well soon!

You might want to re-read your posts.

Have you ever read Karl Popper's theories regarding falsifiability?


If someone said that this is not one of the most beautiful pieces of music ever composed, that would clearly be a wrong opinion, even though it is a subjective opinion (though as near as close to being a fact as a subjective opinion can be).

Some things are factual and opinions about those things can be falsified. For instance, if I hold the opinion that dinosaurs and humans co-existed, then a quick glance at the fossil record will falsify my opinion. That's pretty clearly a wrong opinion.

Some people will abandon wrong opinions and look for more accurate ones. Others prefer the warm glow they get from holding on to their old wrong opinions (unrelated - I'm happy for people to do either, as long as they aren't dicks to each other). But yeah, some opinions can be wrong.

On the other end of the spectrum, some things are purely the preserve of personal preference. Whether or not dyed hair looks good on girls. Whether or not big muscles look good on guys. Whether punk rock is thrillingly nihilistic, or just unpleasant to hear. Whether carrots are nicer than peas (or vice versa).

We act as if art falls somewhere in the middle of that spectrum, because we accept that it's very subjective, but feel that some opinions are truer (or better informed) than others. Opinions are fine as long as they don't get out of hand. It's fine to think that Ulysses is superior to Finnegan's Wake (or vice versa) but you better not say that Twilight is better than either.

I don't buy that to be honest.

Some opinions on a work of art can be grounded in fact. For instance, how skillful or innovative something is. How rewarding it is for people of a certain taste. How rich in allusion it is. How much conversation you could milk it for, if you were talking to a like-minded friend.

But when you talk about how good a piece of art is, I think that really is just a matter of opinion with no right or wrong.



I've not read Popper, but I know he was a big fan of Bach

But no, I don't buy this at all. I think it's a beautiful piece of music, but there's too much "world music" that sounds like dreadful wailing to me. I presume people from other cultures would be equally underwhelmed by Bach.

Even within the West, for fifty years after he died, Bach wasn't much admired as a musician.

Bach's technical accomplishment is on a par with Shakespeare, but beauty is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder.

To make up for that enormous post, I'm gonna watch and grade Ponyo.

Well, once Goktor has entered, there's no longer anything to say really.

Whatever Bradley, we differed on opinion, so be it.

As for Argos, I was merely ranting and criticizing the film, where did I make it look factual?

Just going to respond to your allusions to Picasso and Ponyo being allegorical;

If you say that you can use the same to argue the "love" present in all our wonderful romantic comedies this year, from Leap Year to Valentine's Day. Fact is, and yes this is a fact, Ponyo falls in love with Sosuke, after he says 'I'll take care of you," or something to that effect. ONE LINE from the FIRST HUMAN she met. That's the most superficial presentation of love in a long while. No development whatsoever and everything after is normal happening to two kids hanging out, save the unbelievable journey to find Lisa. What is it you think Miyazaki is trying to show us? What is the symbolic meaning of their relationship? The way love is between two young children? Innocence? The idea of childhood and fantasies?

You could argue for those if the film hadn't then smashed the whole 'world will end if you break up with Ponyo' nonsense at the end. If you want to be carried away by the notion of eternal love or a fable-like storyline, fine, but don't tell me that I'm wrong or lack imagination. Also don't go into metaphors like the world ending is an allusion to Ponyo's world, or a girl's world "ending" once a boy breaks his promise because that's just a generalization for blind love and if anything should be scorned instead of praised here. Hell, like I said this is a kids movie, I shouldn't be explaining anything. It is heavy-handed in it's rhetoric and foolish in execution, in my opinion, of course.

Oh and throwing words out like it seems most critics do without actually explaining their reasoning behind it does not equate to the meaning of said word. You say it's allegorical, or has some deeper meaning, that it's poetic, explain yourself instead of hiding behind terms and speaking it like unjustified truth otherwise don't say it at all.

viewtopic.php?p=1624571#p1624571, beginning with the first line which indicates that you were seeing something completely different from what all the others had seen, another film or the same film through deviant eyes. That, I would claim, is to say that your perception differs from, say, mine, thus creating another version of the facts, of the truth. If your post is not to say that all those who liked the film are in some sense crazy, if we all merely express our opinions, then I really don't understand your ranting.


Is that directed at me or Bradley Witherberry? I mentioned Picasso but never used the word 'allegorical', while Bradley talked about literalmindedness but not about Picasso.

I had been putting this off for awhile since I am kinda meh on the kiddier side of Mayazakis filmography (Kiki, Totoro, etc...)

Ponyo actually falls somewhere in the middle of those films and the more mature Mononoke, Castle in the Sky and Spirited Away (I really like these three.) The imagery of the movie is striking, the destruction of the sea as a result of industry, even in a small town like this one. The tidal wave scene is somehow terrifying and fun at the same time depending on whose point of view we see it from.

Yet I felt didn't feel like the story did too much with the imagery. It all comes down to a love story between two very young children who have no idea what they're really agreeing to. I think making them teens or young adults would have given the story more weight, though it probably wouldn't have become such a sensation among young audiences. I think they'd take the money over a slightly higher grade from me.

So overall it was definitely worth watching even though it didn't hit the top tier. I'll give it a 7.5ish/10.