Comments on: Pet Peeve http://jeremydavidson.org/2008/08/pet-peeve-2/ "An adventure is only an inconvenience rightly considered. An inconvenience is only an adventure wrongly considered." Sun, 11 Dec 2011 03:48:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jeremy Davidson http://jeremydavidson.org/2008/08/pet-peeve-2/#comment-115 Jeremy Davidson Sun, 10 Aug 2008 02:40:05 +0000 http://arrowheights.org/blog/?p=513#comment-115 Luke, Batterson's book is really good. It challenges you to step out and take risks. I will be reviewing his new book on the blog next week. You will have to check it out. We really should have a higher standard for the word classics than the work of Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal. Maybe a channel called "American Movies that Got Made," AMGM. That sounds better to me. Luke, Batterson’s book is really good. It challenges you to step out and take risks. I will be reviewing his new book on the blog next week. You will have to check it out.

We really should have a higher standard for the word classics than the work of Chuck Norris and Steven Seagal. Maybe a channel called “American Movies that Got Made,” AMGM. That sounds better to me.

]]> By: Luke http://jeremydavidson.org/2008/08/pet-peeve-2/#comment-116 Luke Tue, 05 Aug 2008 20:10:37 +0000 http://arrowheights.org/blog/?p=513#comment-116 I too have noticed the sub-par movies that AMC shows. But AMC is on to something here: why do we define "classics" as something that is considered by the masses and critics "good." I hate the Chuck Norris movies, but I find myself consumed with watching because I want to see how predictable the plot will actually get, how unrealistic the fighting scenes will be, and just how awful a script can really be. Can we define classics as just something that draws our attention?...I hope not. By the way, saw that you are reading Batterson's book. I read it last week on the honeymoon- a good book nonetheless. What have you thought about it so far? I too have noticed the sub-par movies that AMC shows. But AMC is on to something here: why do we define “classics” as something that is considered by the masses and critics “good.” I hate the Chuck Norris movies, but I find myself consumed with watching because I want to see how predictable the plot will actually get, how unrealistic the fighting scenes will be, and just how awful a script can really be. Can we define classics as just something that draws our attention?…I hope not.

By the way, saw that you are reading Batterson’s book. I read it last week on the honeymoon- a good book nonetheless. What have you thought about it so far?

]]>