It's sad that some parts of the movie aren't as entertaining as in my run. I am going to correct them.
Phil does not see this as insulting in any way. I however, propose that this statement is insulting, for it connotes that Phil believes that his old work on Castlevania is not only superior to that of Morrison's in terms of entertainment, but that it is Phil's task to put Morrison in his place by 'correcting' his work. It may be that Phil is acting purely on his interpretation of what is entertaining in Castlevania (in which case it would be impossible to convince Phil how one person's opinion can be interpreted in many different ways), but the connotation of this statement is, to put it bluntly, very conceited and arrogant.
Thoughts? I'm fine with being wrong here, but I justify this thread via:
Phil wrote:
If you have a problem with that, then open a new topic so people can discuss.
phil doesn't seem to have an excellent handle on the English language, which I think contributes a bit to the appearance of arrogance.
Of course, when we say that, who is then to say what is appearant arrogance and what is actual arrogance?
How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks.
