Moff's Law is important, IMHO, in cases where ignoring the problem goes hand-in-hand with ignoring something that is actively problematic outside of the world of the film. Handwaving some applied phlebotinum generally doesn't hurt anyone. Handwaving the fact that a movie gives another example of Mighty Whitey and reinforces some truly skeevy imperialistic and/or racist thinking does hurt people. It may also implies that maybe some people are handwaving or flat-out refusing to examine some truly problematic thinking in real life as well.

Agreed.

Whee! The Brattle has a new print of Small Change this coming weekend/week. I haven't seen that since I was in High School.

Scrappy is indeed wise.

And I do think that, just as it's cornflake-pissy to pick apart someone's mindless fun, it's equally cornflake-pissy to walk into a thread where people are happily chattering away and insist that they stop (one blogger I found while Googling "Moff's law" proposed that anyone who takes the time to register on someone else's blog just in order to post "Some people have too much time on their hands" be summarily punched in the crotch by, like, the entire rest of the planet). Some people's cornflakes are thinkier cornflakes, that's all.

The ones that always boggle me are the people who post on Sociological Images complaining that everyone needs to stop taking it all so seriously and just enjoy it. Seriously? I mean, not that that site in particular doesn't occasionally crawl up its own ass, but that should really come as a surprise to exactly nobody, ever. These are sociology professors talking about their undergrad coursework! They do this for a living! Their day jobs are the entire reason for the website's existence! What the fuck did these yahoos think they were going to find here?

And I do think that, just as it's cornflake-pissy to pick apart someone's mindless fun, it's equally cornflake-pissy to walk into a thread where people are happily chattering away and insist that they stop (one blogger I found while Googling "Moff's law" proposed that anyone who takes the time to register on someone else's blog just in order to post "Some people have too much time on their hands" be summarily punched in the crotch by, like, the entire rest of the planet). Some people's cornflakes are thinkier cornflakes, that's all.

JZ is me!

And, hello, Sociological images, not, I don't know, NakedAndWet or VincentChaseinIceCreamTopping.com(What? no, there isn't such a site, but if there were, I'd have bookmarks.) That person flunks reading comprehension, too.

And, hello, Sociological images, not, I don't know, NakedAndWet or VincentChaseinIceCreamTopping.com

I'm sayin'! And it's multiple people, often doing the same thing over and over again over the course of months. And each time they seem sincerely surprised and baffled that these sociology PhDs still haven't taken their advice and retitled the site "LOLCATS and Boobies Yay!"

Hey Erika! Yes, we're bringing the Hat back. I'm posting a call for submissions this very month. In fact, I should post it today.

Sociological images

Love that place if only because I have just been introduced to a Ewan/Chiwetel version of Othello. WANT!

of course you do...who wouldn't? Cool, Corwood, bunk.

'Cause I enjoyed Die Hard and I don't feel that I've lost my credentials as an intelligent being by snickering at the obvious jokes and impossible stunts

I don't think analyzing a movie means "judging it solely on how realistic it is, since that is what makes movies good."

I'd probably take "That was fun," as a good starting-point for conversation. Because then you start thinking about, well, what made it so much fun? Why are many similar action movies not as fun? What did it do differently? And so on.