First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
Older More Memorable
3439 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 2/3/09 , edited 2/3/09

s31r31 wrote:


Jei_Ken wrote:


s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:

Classics are classics


Classics is classics


Nope, classics are classics.


Nope, classics is classics


Nope, classics ARE classics

Classic ~ (noun) a work recognized as definitive in its field.

Make that plural

And yes, there are various definitions for "classic" and "classics"


If you mean classics is classics as in "food is food" then I guess "classics" is a plural, so 'are' would be used.


Poor analogy.

Food is food
Food items are food items.

Again for the record. The word "classic" and the word "classics" has various meanings. I'm just trying to point out that I did nothing wrong on my very first post.


Just by the way, "food" is an object, "classics" is an object. So I was trying to say by saying "object is object". I didn't say "food items" I said "food".

whatever man this isn't an english lesson, just drop it. gosh
3426 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
30 / SORA DE
Offline
Posted 2/3/09


Why bump the thread in the first place? *stops. ignores whatever next come coming*
392 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Makati, Philippines
Offline
Posted 2/9/09

s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:

Classics are classics


Classics is classics


Nope, classics are classics.


Nope, classics is classics


Nope, classics ARE classics

Classic ~ (noun) a work recognized as definitive in its field.

Make that plural

And yes, there are various definitions for "classic" and "classics"


classic is classic that are final

392 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Makati, Philippines
Offline
Posted 2/9/09

voidofsemblance wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:

Classics are classics


Classics is classics


Nope, classics are classics.


Nope, classics is classics


Wrong!

Classics be classics.

classics was classic

1604 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22 / F / iN tHaT tInY bLuE...
Offline
Posted 2/9/09
older animes are more memorable than newer animes because they're older
1901 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
34 / F
Offline
Posted 2/9/09
i find the longer the more memorable
75333 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
40 / M / East of West
Offline
Posted 2/9/09
NOTE: This thread has too much bureaucratic overhead.

Things that come to mind concerning older anime:

They were more likely to create an anime that was personal to them. To some extent it was a part of the creator. Today there are more animes created for the business of anime (usually denoted by superficial plot lines, fan service, and plot devices designed to shock and awe just for the sake of shocking and awing). For instance, Time of Eve has good imagery, a good plot, but I think these things really shine because the creator is really trying to express something personal and fascinating. They are trying to serve you rather than sell you.

The old anime was new to me. First impressions can really last. I have a lot more anime under my belt now to compare a new series to. Its hard to be something original and ground breaking. For instance, I like Vampire Princess Miyu, but gosh the graphics by todays standards are retro, the character designs in parts are laughable and distracting, and sometimes it is just plain boring. For whatever reason I still really like this and the struggles and feelings of the creator resonated within me.

$.02...
392 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
46 / M / Makati, Philippines
Offline
Posted 3/20/09

voidofsemblance wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:


kirovitsky wrote:


s31r31 wrote:

Classics are classics


Classics is classics


Nope, classics are classics.


Nope, classics is classics


Wrong!

Classics be classics.


yup whatever
=truce=
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.