Posts from markgpl in thread „Here's Something I Just Don't Get“

Quote from Stumpy

Guess what, Mark - this is one old dude who absolutely revels in the fact that he's not "cool" or "chic", what I consider a flock of sheeple who march in lockstep.

I've been a rebel against the conventional all my life and have managed to progress pretty well despite those tendencies. Back when Jimmy Carter was president, he fired a major general who protested Carter's plans to reduce the number of troops in Korea. I wrote Carter what I call a "nastygram" and said if he wanted a military force of yes-men, to count me out. My colonel was shocked that I had the temerity to do such a thing but didn't forbid me to do so - I think because he probably agreed but was just too conventional to say so.

Early in my military career, I don't mind admitting (though with a slight touch of shame) that I held unit records a couple of times for having the most Article 15s (captain's masts for you ex-sailors). I just refused to acknowledge that my superiors could tell me what to do after duty hours so often forged passes (liberty chits). I used to get busted so often I told my buddies I should attach my rank insignia with zippers. :teeth_smile:

Hi Stumpy:

Well, it's interesting, but your post and your reference to being a "rebel against the conventional" doesn't completely surprise me - I kind of got the sense from your posts (both the tone and the content) that you had an "independant" streak in you. It's funny, but even as something as "impersonal" as these types of forums, you can get a 'feel" for the type of person who exists behind the words on the screen.

What does surprise me, though, is that somebody who possessed a rebellious streak against convention would choose a career in the military - it kind of seems like a 'contradiction" to some extent. Kind of like an incredibly extroverted person choosing a career as an actuary or an accountant - but I guess there are exceptions to every rule.

And it's even more surprising that you progressed up the ranks. I guess your career was alot of 2 steps forward and 1 step backward..??:teeth_smile:

I've never served in the military, but I could see how having somebody tell you what you can do in your off hours might rub you the wrong way - it would certainly go against my grain..!

Quote from chester7777

I haven't read too many. The ones I have read and remember, I did really enjoy, and have actively sought them out at the library so I could read them again, years later. Not for any particular reason, it just happens that none of them took place in a Western setting.



Now just a darn-tootin' minute!! I am NOT ashamed to admit that I like Barry Manilow! Even if it does elicit groans . . . . I have enjoyed his music since his very first hit back in '74.

I have NEVER been cool (at least not in most places) . . . and that's OK with me!

Mrs. C

Display More

I'm so soooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrry, Sue for using Barry Manilow as a "reference" point.

I should have just stuck with disco and left it at that..:teeth_smile:

Quote from SXViper

Basically its not the "cool" thing right now. Comic book heroes and horror movies seem to be the biggest selling movies. I get the comic book hero movies as I enjoy them alot myself, well the good ones anyways. But the horror stuff is don't right sad. Too me it looks like each movie try's to out do the previous one as to how a person dies or how much gore can be put into the death scene.

I just think its not cool to like western's or the west in the mainstream right now so they add a "disclaimer" like that before a review.

I think you're right - I think it's a (big) factor as well. However, I also thought that Chester7777 made a very valid point and it's one that I had never even considered before - .sombody reads a Louis L"Amour book or watches a John Wayne movie and it's the first time they've ever read or seen anything western and they're surprised because they actually enjoyed it.

As SaddleTramp pointed out, it would be like admitting to really liking disco music or Barry Manilow (not that there's anything wrong with that for people who happen to like this stuff:teeth_smile:). Just not too "cool" in 2008 I guess.

Quote from chester7777

markgpl,

I'm assuming the reviews that are prefaced with "normally, I'm not a big fan of westerns, but..." are positive reviews.

Now the way that I read that is not that the person is necessarily embarrassed by the fact that they have now read a book or seen a film in the genre, but that they extended themselves beyond their routine reading/watching habits, and discovered that they enjoyed a Western. I would think that would be an encouragement to others to "go outside their comfort zone" and try it out, too.

You're right, if a book has great characters, a good story line, etc. it just does, despite the genre. Unfortunately, many people won't even check things out because of a certain style. However, a good recommendation might get one to actively pursue a book or film he/she might not otherwise read/watch.

Mrs. C

Display More

Hi Chester7777:

You're exactly right - they are positive reviews.

I never thought about it before, but I think your comment about "extending" themselves is probably very accurate. While I agree with a couple of the other posters that one of the possible reasons for this 'disclaimer" is that it's not "cool / hip / chic" to like "horse operas" these days, I think your opinion is probably equally valid as well.

As a 55 year old man who likes westerns and action / adventure / military books and films, I would probably preface a review of a historical romance novel, for example, that I read and enjoyed with the EXACT same type of disclaimer "normally I don't read romance novels, but....".

Good point and one that I never even considered. By the way, how are historical romance novels - any good..???

Like the title says, here's something that I just don't get.

Occasionally, I'll post a review over on Amazon and, because I love westerns so much, alot of the previous reviews I've written have addressed films and books in the western genre.

And in addition to posting reviews, I'll oftentimes read alot of the other peoples reviews.

I wish I had a dollar for every review I've read where somebody will preface their review by saying something like "normally, I'm not a big fan of westerns, but..."

I just don't get it - what the heck does the fact that a particular movie / book that deals with Arizona in the 1880's, for example, have to do with the 'price of eggs".

A great book is a great book and a great movie is a great movie and whether it takes place in Scotland in the middle ages (i.e,Braveheart) or Texas in the 1870's (i.e. Red River), the time period and the location makes absolutely no difference to me.

If the book / film has great characters and a compelling story, it's going to be good regardless of the time period or the place where the story takes place.

Even the "professional" reviewers will express astonishment at times that a movie like Open Range or Unforgiven or 3;10 To Yuma could be so good in the year 1996 or 2007 when nobody supposedly has any interest in westerns.

Like I say, I just don't get it - it's as if it's somehow embarrassing to acknowledge that you really happened to enjoy a movie / book that took take place in the American west in the latter half of the 19th century.

Anybody else notice this..??