Academy Awards Poll from the 90

[CharlieSherry 0]

This is 90

I vote for

Home Alone

[Morn 8]

Schindler's List.

[stewdog1 50]

The list that Schindler kept.

[Morn 8]

Schindler's Ark.

[JoeinAR 1,949]

I voted for Home Alone, though its not my favorite from the 90's, that would be Jurassic Park, or Lost World.

Joe, who never listens to Schindler's Least.

[Morlock 11]

I had to vote for Schindler's list, with Home Alone and the left out Jurrasic Park close seconds.

[Magnus 0]

Voted for Schindler's List. Btw, why didn't the jury nominate Jurassic Park?! god damn fools....

[scissorhands 16]

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Williams' best score in the last fiveteen years.

However, Schindler's List is musically perfect.

Amistad is a MASTERPIECE (it's in my TOP 10)

Sleepers (I can't remember if you wrote it in the poll) is another masterpiece.

Jurassic Park and its sequel are perfect scores.

The Phantom Menace is (with TESB) the best SW score.

Angela's Ashes and JFK are so deeply emotional...

Seven Years in Tibet is another great score.

And Home Alone 2 is my 4th favorite soundtrack.

My God! THE NINETIES ARE THE BEST WILLIAMS DECADE!!!!!!!!!!

[MAG-SI 10]

My God! THE NINETIES ARE THE BEST WILLIAMS DECADE!!!!!!!!!!

Saving Private Rayn for me also!!

[JoeinAR 1,949]

SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. Williams' best score in the last fiveteen years.

My God! THE NINETIES ARE THE BEST WILLIAMS DECADE!!!!!!!!!!

For you perhaps but not for me. SPR is as boring and non descript a score as I can remember.

The 90's pales in comparison to the great works of the 70's and 80's.

the best of the 90's doesn't even make the top 3 or 4 of either the 70's or the 80's. At least from this list.

Joe, who thinks the Titanic score is better than any on this 90's list.

[Romão 2,274]

I agree the 90's were a great decade for Williams music. The best of the bunch is clearly Schindler's List, although I am a very big fan of Amistad, Seven Years in Tibet and the Phantom Menace. All these score rank very high in my book as JW scores are concerned.

[Romão 2,274]

Joe, who thinks the Titanic score is better than any on this 90's list.

It is inferior to Schindler's List, Amistad and Seven years in Tibet in every way, IMHO.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Home Alone, Schindler's right behind it.

Although Far and Away is his best of the 90s to me, and JP is right up there too. Can't believe neither were even nominated!!!

Ray Barnsbury

[Romão 2,274]

Not to mention Hook.

[Hlao-roo 389]

I kinda wish Star Wars: Episode I or Stepmom or Nixon or JFK were on the list, but in their absence, I guess I'll go with Sleepers (closely followed by Saving Private Ryan).

I'm not sure how Titanic is relevant in all this, but what the heck: James Horner ripping off Enya's "Book of Days" was probably the highlight of the score.

And I actually the like the song in and of itself. But both its singer and its former ubiquity have greatly detracted from it, for me.

I've never watched the movie.

[Ray Barnsbury 8]

Not to mention Hook.

How could I forget Hook? Probably under JP for me.

Ray Barnsbury

[tpigeon 3]

Schindler's List, with Angela's Ashes and JFK close behind.

Ted

[metaphor123 0]

Out of that list, its easily Schindler's List, though I'm flabbergasted Jurassic Park was not nominated.

[Ricard 2,245]

The 90's pales in comparison to the great works of the 70's and 80's.

Needless to say, I agree. And I'm sure those who think otherwise would agree too, had they lived the 70s and the 80s.

[Morn 8]

Don't be ridiculous, it is an absurd generalization to say that. If the year had a significant affect on what I liked, why would most of my favourite composers other than Williams be dead? And why would I consider 80's his best decade even though I only remember the very end of it and didn't know Williams at all?

The 70's only really had Star Wars and Jaws and maybe Ce3k and Superman that holds a candle to things like TESB, Raiders, ET, ROTJ, TOD and Hook, Far And Away, Schindler's List and Angela's Ashes. Another problem with the 70's, the large number of average to quite good works. The 90's and 80's had hardly anything that wasn't very good at least.

[Ricard 2,245]

Morn, if you had lived in those days you would enjoy much more the scores from the 70s and 80s. I have no doubt about it.

The 70's only really had Star Wars and Jaws and maybe Ce3k and Superman that holds a candle to things like TESB, Raiders, ET, ROTJ, TOD and Hook, Far And Away, Schindler's List and Angela's Ashes..

The 70s "only really had" Jane Eyre, The Cowboys, The Poseidon Adventure, Images, Cinderella Liberty, Conrack (an underrated and unkown gem), The Towering Inferno, The Eiger Sanction (also underrated), Jaws, Midway, Black Sunday, Star Wars, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, The Fury, Jaws 2, SUPERMAN, Dracula, 1941 and, of course, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK which, whether you like it or not, was composed in the 70s (not taking into account that the year of the release was actually part of the 70s also). ALL of them better works (and YES, more 'complex' and as 'mature') than most scores from the 90s.

Another problem with the 70's, the large number of average to quite good works.

That would be the main problem with the 90s.

The 90's and 80's had hardly anything that wasn't very good at least.

The 80s yes, but from the 90s (and the 00s) I could name quite a few scores that would never be on par with the above mentioned scores.

Ricard - Who, nevertheless, has 2 scores from the 90s in his Top 10 list.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

Ricard - Who, nevertheless, has 2 scores from the 90s in his Top 10 list.

Which are?

Stefancos- who thinks Far & Away might be one.

[Morn 8]

Morn, if you had lived in those days you would enjoy much more the scores from the 70s and 80s. I have no doubt about it.

The 70s "only really had" Jane Eyre, The Cowboys, The Poseidon Adventure, Images, Cinderella Liberty, Conrack (an underrated and unkown gem), The Towering Inferno, The Eiger Sanction (also underrated), Jaws, Midway, Black Sunday, Star Wars, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS OF THE THIRD KIND, The Fury, Jaws 2, SUPERMAN, Dracula, 1941

LOL

and, of course, THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK which, whether you like it or not, was composed in the 70s (not taking into account that the year of the release was actually part of the 70s also).

Last few months of 79, that's almost the 80's, and considering it was released in 80's.... you could call it either.

ALL of them better works (and YES, more 'complex' and as 'mature') than most scores from the 90s.

Perhaps you can make an arguement for Images (rather simple but mature), Jane Eyre and Ce3k, rest I can't agree with.

That would be the main problem with the 90s.

The 80s yes, but from the 90s (and the 00s) I could name quite a few scores that would never be on par with the above mentioned scores.

:?

[Ricard 2,245]

Morn' date=' if you had lived in those days you would enjoy much more the scores from the 70s and 80s. I have no doubt about it.[/quote']

Wake up boy' date=' and face the truth.

The 80s yes' date=' but from the 90s (and the 00s) I could name quite a few scores that would never be on par with the above mentioned scores.[/quote']

:?

I don't want to hurt your feelings

[Morn 8]

Wake up boy, and face the truth.

There is no truth, just opinion, hence the yawn.

Anyone laughing at those scores shows how seriously he should be taken.

I'll use that line next time you laugh and something.

As I said, whether you like it or not, TESB IS from the 70s. It was released, recorded and yes, RELEASED in the 70s.

Wasn't TESB released in 1980?

Simply because you don't really know the rest of those scores (what a surprise!)

I know them.

Is that all you have to say?

See above.

I don't want to hurt your feelings

No, you make me worry about you.

[Ricard 2,245]

I don't want to hurt your feelings

No' date=' you make me worry about you.[/quote']

Your problem.

[Justin 2]

Wake up boy, and face the truth.

As much as I hate to say it Ricard even if you are the webmaster your opinion is not truth.

There is no truth, just opinion, hence the yawn.

Well that's your opinion.

Justin -Who thinks this whole thread is getting quite silly.

[Morn 8]

Simply because you don't really know the rest of those scores (what a surprise!)

I know them.

Sure...

:roll:

See above.

That would be plagiarism.

[Romão 2,274]

JW has been composing great scores for the last 35 years, maybe even more, but my knowledge of his earlier works is quite limited.

All decades have masterpieces in them. I do think that the average score quality is better now than 20 years ago, but that's just me.

And Ricard, i do not agree that if I had lived in the 70's and 80's I would apreciate the socres more (I do love them). I only became a JW fan in 1997, and my favorite scores are, for ex, Schindler's List, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Return of the Jedi, Jane Eyre, Jurassic Park, Hook, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade, Amistad and Seven Years in Tibet (which I only heard and saw the movie 2 years ago). Besides those, the latest SW scores, A.I and Harry potter became some of my favorites, but I really don't think how being there when those scores were released as anything to do with my enjoyment of them. I just judge the music itself. I agree that it is exciting to be there when some classic score is released, but in the pre-Internet era, I don't see how it was different to listen to a brand new score in 1980 than to listen to a score for the 1st time that is already 10 years old. But I do concede that being there when scores are released may influence some people's opinion about the music, I just don't think it would have made any difference with myself.

Cheers, mate beerchug

[Morn 8]

Same goes for me Merkel.

[Luke Skywalker 1,795]

Yes. And 1980 is technically the last year of the 70s.

Then the decade is the '71s?

[Ricard 2,245]

Whatever it is' date=' it makes the mistake in assuming that the name of the year is some property of the universe like gravity.[/quote']

Decades are conventions which use a logic based on numbers. According to that logic' date=' TESB is from the 70s. Period.

See above.

That would be plagiarism.

How unoriginal. That reply doesn't even make sense here.

[Morn 8]

You'll know the answer when you grow up.

Ohh please, I can't believe you'd make such illogical assumptions.

Once again, when you don't know what to reply you start lying. I never laughed at Williams' scores from the 00s. And I definitely never laughed at a dozen Williams scores from the 00s (???) or any other decade.

Yes you did, when I once said that his 00's works have more maturity.

Decades are conventions which use a logic based on numbers. According to that logic, TESB is from the 70s. Period.

You are trying to apply pure math conventions over already established conventions that exist for the years. It's being contrarian for no purpose.

How unoriginal. That reply doesn't even make sense here.

Makes perfect sense, was sarcasm to your earlier reply as you just copyed what I wrote.

[Ricard 2,245]

It's being contrarian for no purpose.

YOU said WHAT???

How unoriginal. That reply doesn't even make sense here.

Makes perfect sense' date=' was sarcasm to your earlier reply as you just copyed what I wrote. [/quote']

No. It's the result of not reading my post properly.

And finally, a little advise. Please don't manipulate other people's words (or even yours) when you don't have anything to say. You may or may not realize it, but you do this all the time. It is VERY ANNOYING AND DISTURBING, and you end up looking like a dork. And keep in mind that I'm not the only one involved in this kind of 'incidents'. So believe me, it's not a very good idea to keep trying to insult people's intelligence in every thread.

Thanks,

[JoeinAR 1,949]

Ok enough of this already.

A decade is a period of 10 years. the Decade of the 70's is

1970,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79.

No 80, but as Ricard said it was composed in the 70's. It was recorded in the early months of the first year of the 80's. So what. It is still from that time period of 1974 to 1984 where John composed or released the scores of Towering Inferno, Jaws, Midway, Star Wars, Close Encounter, Jaws 2, Superman, The Fury, 1941, the Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., ROTJ, Monsignor, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

there were other scores released but I'd have to look them all up.

NO other 10 year period contains such great scores as these. NONE. You can claim all you want but it will do no good to lie even to yourself.

[#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265]

And finally, a little advise. Please don't manipulate other people's words (or even yours) when you don't have anything to say. You may or may not realize it, but you do this all the time. It is VERY ANNOYING AND DISTURBING, and you end up looking like a dork. And keep in mind that I'm not the only one involved in this kind of 'incidents'. So believe me, it's not a very good idea to keep trying to insult people's intelligence in every thread.

Thanks,

Don't mention it. LOL

Stefancos- who thinks Morn is turning into a new Chrushercomix.

[Hlao-roo 389]

Although it'd do less to defend your public honor and pride and whatnot, it seems to me that private messages would be the route to go from here on out. I think that'd be cool.

Best wishes,

Alan

[Hlao-roo 389]

Ok enough of this already.

A decade is a period of 10 years. the Decade of the 70's is

1970,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79.  

No 80, but as Ricard said it was composed in the 70's.  It was recorded in the early months of the first year of the 80's.  So what.  It is still from that time period of 1974 to 1984 where John composed or released the scores of Towering Inferno, Jaws, Midway, Star Wars, Close Encounter, Jaws 2, Superman, The Fury, 1941, the Empire Strikes Back, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., ROTJ, Monsignor, and Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom.

there were other scores released but I'd have to look them all up.

NO other 10 year period contains such great scores as these. NONE.  You can claim all you want but it will do no good to lie even to yourself.

OK, OK, here're my thoughts, which are likely erroneous, but whatever.

The, for example, "70's" is indeed 1970 - 1979.

But for purposes of calling a time period a "decade," the years would be 1971 - 1980. Why?

Well, it's kinda analagous to the recent situation with the turn of the century. Although most people celebrated the turn of the century in 2000, it in fact occurred in 2001. So, 2000 was still part of the 20th century. In much the same way, 1980 was part of the "8th decade" of the 20th century, if you like.

To sum up, even though I'm probably making a fool of myself here, this is the way it is, again:

1970 to 1979 is the "seventies." 1971 - 1980 would be the decade.

Enough of that.

- Alan

[Hlao-roo 389]

And finally, a little advise. Please don't manipulate other people's words (or even yours) when you don't have anything to say. You may or may not realize it, but you do this all the time. It is VERY ANNOYING AND DISTURBING, and you end up looking like a dork. And keep in mind that I'm not the only one involved in this kind of 'incidents'. So believe me, it's not a very good idea to keep trying to insult people's intelligence in every thread.

Thanks,

Don't mention it. LOL

Stefancos- who thinks Morn is turning into a new Chrushercomix. 8O

I dunno. A few of Ricard's statements did irk me as well, though to not quite the same extent they did Morn. Like, to paraphrase crudely here...."Believe me, if you'd lived through the seventies, you'd've definitely thought it was superior to the nineties." So my response closely mirrors Morn's, in a sense: what a presumptuous statement. And Ricard's response, it would seem, would be (again, paraphrasing): you only say that because you haven't the lived the years I have, you haven't experienced as much, and so on. Well, of course, that effectively ends the discussion/argument/whatever right there, because anything I say from that point on which which Ricard disagrees, he can easily refute by saying that I haven't been listening to scores for as long as he has.

Of course, I can see someone else, like Joe, for example, who already sides with Ricard as far as "decade tastes" go, looking at this cynically, and somewhat condescendingly, and saying...well, look at this. Alan, Justin, Morn. Ha, the younger generation. They love the 90's because...well, that's the decade they know best. But if they were old as I am, and had listened to scores as long as I have, they'd know better. They'd understand what makes the 1970's and 1980's so special.

[Ricard 2,245]

Alan, it's not 'listening to those scores for as long as we have', but listening to them in the time they were released. Your appreciation would be totally different.

[Hlao-roo 389]

Alan, it's not 'listening to those scores for as long as we have', but listening to them in the time they were released. Your appreciation would be totally different.

Good point, I (obviously) didn't understand that this is what you saying earlier.

[Ricard 2,245]

As much as I hate to say it Ricard even if you are the webmaster your opinion is not truth.:

Of course it's not. But I wasn't stating an opinion.

[Ricard 2,245]

And Ricard, i do not agree that if I had lived in the 70's and 80's I would apreciate the socres more (I do love them).

I bet you'd love them even more

I just judge the music itself.

But your judgement is linked to the time you're living. Listening to Star Wars in 1977 has nothing to do with listening to it 20 years later.

I agree that it is exciting to be there when some classic score is released, but in the pre-Internet era, I don't see how it was different to listen to a brand new score in 1980 than to listen to a score for the 1st time that is already 10 years old.

Believe me, it was a TOTALLY DIFFERENT experience

But I do concede that being there when scores are released may influence some people's opinion about the music, I just don't think it would have made any difference with myself.

Just wait a few years and you'll see.

[Romão 2,274]

It's like you said, Ricard. We'll have to wait and see. But I still prefer the 90's and 00's Williams.

[Uni 306]

Oh, joy....a good ol' slugfest.

You are trying to apply pure math conventions over already established conventions that exist for the years. It's being contrarian for no purpose.

This is hilarious. The irony screams. Our favorite JWMB Contrarian pointing the finger at someone else....as he stirs up contention about something he clearly doesn't understand.

The "established conventions that exist for the years" are just as Ricard has stated them. 1980 is indeed the last year of the seventies. To say otherwise would be the same as me asking you to tell me what the first ten integers are, and you answering, "Zero, one, two, three...." and so on. You would count one to ten without thinking; the number ten is the last integer in that sequence. Just because people have taken the shortcut of defining decades by the number in the tens column doesn't alter fact. It's a "convention" now dictated by habit, which is fine, I suppose; but to argue against reality - citing "logic" - is ridiculous.

Alan, it's not 'listening to those scores for as long as we have', but listening to them in the time they were released. Your appreciation would be totally different.

I have to agree with this. I can learn to appreciate films from the forties and fifties, but I would never presume to truly understand the impact their original releases had on that generation of people. Similarly, I can understand the tragedy of JFK's death - and Stone's film and Williams score can contribute to the endeavor admirably - but I will never completely comprehend the emotions of that day. Where was I when Kennedy was shot? Nowhere yet, the proverbial glint in my father's eye, nothing more. In the same way, the events of 9/11 will shape my grandchildren's future (Lord willing I have some someday), but they will never fully perceive the awful weight of living through that day. (This is probably an extreme example of the concept we're discussing, but I think it's close enought to the mark.) Two people can quantitatively hear a particular score exactly the same number of times, but there is a definite qualitative difference if one of them grew up with the music, as opposed to encountering it later in life and cramming the same number of listening experiences into a much shorter period. This does not belittle the latter's taste, discrimination, or musical appreciation; it is simply approaching the same point from different perspectives.

And having grown up with the scores of the late seventies and early eighties, to hear someone saying they "don't hold a candle" to the more recent "classics" makes me shake my head with wonder - though, since I consider it policy to regard the speaker's appreciation of convention and use of logic with a sizable grain of disbelief, I would hardly give much gravity to the saying of it. On the other hand....

Joe, who thinks the Titanic score is better than any on this 90's list.

*slapping my forehead* Great Caesar's Ghost....now I know I've heard it all. :roll:

- Uni

[Uni 306]

Oh yeah....once upon a time, this thread was about something. I nearly forgot....

The list (both of them) belong to Schindler - but I agree that the list is short a couple of titles. JP and Far and Away are glaring absences, and it's a close race as to which I would choose as my favorite to receive a nomination (wait - did F&A get a nomination?).

My fave of the 90's in general, however, is Hook. Listened to it again just last night, and was again swept away.

- Uni

[Morn 8]

How unoriginal. That reply doesn't even make sense here.

Makes perfect sense' date=' was sarcasm to your earlier reply as you just copyed what I wrote. [/quote']

No. It's the result of not reading my post properly.

Ohh good dammit, it was a joke. :roll:

And finally, a little advise. Please don't manipulate other people's words (or even yours) when you don't have anything to say. You may or may not realize it, but you do this all the time. It is VERY ANNOYING AND DISTURBING, and you end up looking like a dork. And keep in mind that I'm not the only one involved in this kind of 'incidents'. So believe me, it's not a very good idea to keep trying to insult people's intelligence in every thread.

Perhaps you should remember this wise quote from ROTJ, "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." You see, I don't lie, I just have a different point of view.

A decade is a period of 10 years. the Decade of the 70's is

1970,71,72,73,74,75,76,77,78,79.

Exactly

there were other scores released but I'd have to look them all up.

NO other 10 year period contains such great scores as these. NONE. You can claim all you want but it will do no good to lie even to yourself.

Haha, this is the stupidist most arrogant thing I've read in a long time.

But for purposes of calling a time period a "decade," the years would be 1971 - 1980. Why?

Well, it's kinda analagous to the recent situation with the turn of the century. Although most people celebrated the turn of the century in 2000, it in fact occurred in 2001. So, 2000 was still part of the 20th century. In much the same way, 1980 was part of the "8th decade" of the 20th century, if you like.

Is this due to that whole deal of there being no year zero? There is no siginificance to year 0 or 1, whatever you want to call it, and there is no reason to change what we consider a decade to be because of it! It's being so picky that it gives new meaning to the word dork.

1970 to 1979 is the "seventies." 1971 - 1980 would be the decade.

I dunno. A few of Ricard's statements did irk me as well, though to not quite the same extent they did Morn. Like, to paraphrase crudely here...."Believe me, if you'd lived through the seventies, you'd've definitely thought it was superior to the nineties." So my response closely mirrors Morn's, in a sense: what a presumptuous statement. And Ricard's response, it would seem, would be (again, paraphrasing): you only say that because you haven't the lived the years I have, you haven't experienced as much, and so on. Well, of course, that effectively ends the discussion/argument/whatever right there, because anything I say from that point on which which Ricard disagrees, he can easily refute by saying that I haven't been listening to scores for as long as he has.

Alan, it's not 'listening to those scores for as long as we have', but listening to them in the time they were released. Your appreciation would be totally different.

I knew he ment that, and I still think it's too presumptuous. If it had much effect on me, surely I'd like his 00's and late 90's scores as much as his older scores when I think only AI lives up to them, the amount of maturity not with standing, because that is a seperate objective and not subjective issue.

Believe me, it was a TOTALLY DIFFERENT experience

Ahh yes, as you had Lp's and not CD's back then, right? But really, I do not think it will make much difference how much everyone is talking about it. The music is the same now and back then, and just because everyone is talking about it, doesn't mean that it will sound better. I had a really great first impact with the star wars scores for example only due to the quality of the music, was like no experience I had before. I did not need to be living in the time of it's release god dammit to know it was really good music!

But your judgement is linked to the time you're living. Listening to Star Wars in 1977 has nothing to do with listening to it 20 years later.

Well, I don't think so, from your perspective it might seem so because you are a different person today and can't have that sort of experience anymore.

It's like you said, Ricard. We'll have to wait and see. But I still prefer the 90's and 00's Williams.

I don't, I prefer the 80's Williams even though I wasn't around then, I think that a much stronger arguement than Ricard is that he's so in love with the old Williams that he is unable to look at the new Williams with an open mind.

This is hilarious. The irony screams. Our favorite JWMB Contrarian pointing the finger at someone else....as he stirs up contention about something he clearly doesn't understand.

I said being contrarian for no purpose, I am always contrarian for a purpose. There is no purpose is trying to change what one calls a decade just to make it right mathetically.

The "established conventions that exist for the years" are just as Ricard has stated them. 1980 is indeed the last year of the seventies. To say otherwise would be the same as me asking you to tell me what the first ten integers are, and you answering, "Zero, one, two, three...." and so on.

No it would not, years are different to normal numbers. And to try and graft mathetical rules onto it doesn't make much sense. Rather like trying to count hours in 100's rather than 60's.

You would count one to ten without thinking; the number ten is the last integer in that sequence. Just because people have taken the shortcut of defining decades by the number in the tens column doesn't alter fact. It's a "convention" now dictated by habit, which is fine, I suppose; but to argue against reality - citing "logic" - is ridiculous.

Habbits frequently dictate standards, you know. There is no reality here, it's all naming systems invented by humans, meaning that we don't have to strickly stick to it. And meaning it makes more sense to go by what is commanly used.

[Hlao-roo 389]

And I was only laughing anyway because you always laugh at things you disagree with a lot.

Um...yeah. So you love Ricard so much you have to emulate him.

Perhaps you should remember this wise quote from ROTJ, "Luke, you're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view." You see, I don't lie, I just have a different point of view.

LOL, this is complete BS.

Is this due to that whole deal of there being no year zero? There is no siginificance to year 0 or 1, whatever you want to call it, and there is no reason to change what we consider a decade to be because of it! It's being so picky that it gives new meaning to the word dork.

Oh, I see. Being correct is equivalent to being dorky...

The significance is that it explains why we call the 1900's the 20th century. Uh-oh, I'm pointlessly imposing "mathematical logic" on you. I'm so sorry, Morn.

[Morn 8]

Um...yeah.  So you love Ricard so much you have to emulate him.

No, mock him

LOL, this is complete BS.

Oh, I see.  Being correct is equivalent to being dorky...

No, trying to apply the same rules to things that are merely similar but not the same. Besides the fact that..... this is merely a naming system and there is no correct, just a comman agreement on what it's called. And the comman agreement with years is that a decade goes from eg 1970 to 1979. My point, if it's based on maths logic or not, it's just a naming system and it's laughable to be so picky about it.

The significance is that it explains why we call the 1900's the 20th century.  Uh-oh, I'm pointlessly imposing "mathematical logic" on you.  I'm so sorry, Morn.

Mathematical logic isn't necessary here, these are year names, not quite the same as normal numbers. It's just pretentious to call 1980 the 70's.

[Ricard 2,245]

I don't lie, I just have a different point of view.

That's the typical excuse from those who manipulate the facts without noticing it.

I did not need to be living in the time of it's release god dammit to know it was really good music!

As I said before, one day you'll know what I'm talking about.

I think that a much stronger arguement than Ricard is that he's so in love with the old Williams that he is unable to look at the new Williams with an open mind.

I've always had a very open mind. Otherwise this site and this forum wouldn't exist. Never forget that.