The Instigator
sitdownnow
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zarroette
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Is La La Land a good film?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Zarroette
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/26/2017 Category: Movies
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 962 times Debate No: 102237
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

sitdownnow

Pro

This film is not just a cheesy Hollywood movie. It shows the brutality of trying to get into showbusiness whilst using the Musical genre to progress its story line. I dare you to disagree.
Zarroette

Con

Thank you for the opportunity to debate this, Pro.

Counter-arguments

1) My opponent fails to define what "good" is. How can you, as a voter, agree with Pro when you aren't told what you should be convinced of? Pro cannot affirm the resolution if the resolution isn't defined, hence the resolution is not affirmed.

2) My opponent fails to tie his/her arguments to the resolution. There are only statements of what the film is (e.g "not just a cheesy Hollywood movie"). Pro never shows *why* these things are "good", hence the resolution is not affirmed.


Negative Case

Using definition a(2) from Merriam Webster, I am going to define "good" as: "bountiful, fertile" (https://www.merriam-webster.com...).

Clearly, a movie is not "liberal or generous in bestowing gifts or favors" (bountiful: https://www.merriam-webster.com...).

Clearly, a movie is not "producing or bearing many crops in great quantities" (fertile: https://www.merriam-webster.com...).

Since a movie cannot fit either description, it is impossible for the film to be good, hence the resolution is negated.


Summary

My opponent fails to affirm the resolution. I succeed in negating the resolution. This is why you should vote for me.

Thank you for reading.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by ShabShoral 8 months ago
ShabShoral
I saw the film 10 times in theatres. It definitely produced many crops :)
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by DboPoint 8 months ago
DboPoint
sitdownnowZarroetteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made a thorough and comprehensive argument, well structured and with referenced sources.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 8 months ago
zmikecuber
sitdownnowZarroetteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments to Con. Pro didn't really even specify which side he was on. He takes the pro position, but then seems to argue against the movie. Con presents brief rebuttal arguments that demonstrate the lack of thought put into Pro's argument. Dictionary sources don't count, no points awarded in that category. Spelling and grammar was equal. Conduct tied.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 8 months ago
Jonbonbon
sitdownnowZarroetteTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Not really sure what pro's point was. Looks like he was just challenging someone to disagree. Con did, and since pro didn't actually support his statement, con wins arguments.