The Instigator
CoronerPerry
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
Logical-Master
Pro (for)
Winning
42 Points

this script should be made into a feature length 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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/20/2008 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,243 times Debate No: 5762
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (23)
Votes (8)

 

CoronerPerry

Con

this script, written in 2007 should not be made into a feature length film...

Dorothy-Follow the yellow brick road… x4
Frodo-Yes Dorothy, I Get it now. you've repeated it for the past fifteen agonizing miles. "Follow the {YELLOW BRICK} Road!!!!!
Dorothy-I'm sorry, You know I have short term memory loss, I need to say it to my self over and over and over and over and over and over (Frodo screams)… and over again just so that I can remember what I' doing... wait.…, what were we doing?
Frodo-FOLLOW THE YELLOW BRICK ROAD YOU BLONDE!!!!!
Dorothy-Yes it is my natural hair color
Frodo-AGH!!!!!
Blaine- As we join Dorothy gale with her little "friend",
Trent- In their quest to seek the wizard of oz,
Blaine- Commonly know as
Both- The wizard of Oz
Trent- from the classical playwright musical and movie of the 1950's
Blaine- the wizard of Oz
Trent- we introduce to you
Blaine- our interpretation of
Both- The wizard of Oz

Dorothy-Frodo I don't think we're in The Shire anymore
Frodo-Really I couldn't tell…Hey look a fork in the road
Dorothy-Really like where. Oh not that kind of fork silly, it's a fork because there's one two three…….four yellow brick roads… wait so which one do we follow Frodo, Frodo, Frodo!!!

(while Dorothy talks Frodo does headphone action/air guitar)

Scarecrow-Well you could go that way
Dorothy-Who was that?
Scarecrow-Maybe that way? Or that way? And possibly that way.
Dorothy-Are you okay?
Scarecrow-Yah, don't touch me you…Blonde. Where you going?
Dorothy-I don't know.
Frodo-We're going to the wizard of Oz, don't ask her about it she has no idea.
Scarecrow-Is she ever going to snap out of it?
Frodo-Don't count on it. … Shoes.
Dorothy-OMG, don't you just love them AHHH! I got them at Payless last week with BOGO discount and also got some new pretty pink pumps…
Frodo-Let's leave her and see if she notices.
Scarecrow-I'm right behind ya.
Dorothy-Wait up my BFF'S

(harmonica motion, tone, sing song)

Dorothy-I'm kind of in a fructactulous mood, let's lets, let's. hey look! Coconut trees!!!
Frodo-It's called a palm tree
Scarecrow-I wish I was as smart as you….. I don't have a brain….. maybe the wizard…. ahh never mind. I'm screwed…. smiles stupidly
Dorothy-frodo, will you grab one from me?
Frodo-Dorothy, I'm two feet tall….
Dorothy-ya?
Frodo-scarecrow, will you get one please.
scarecrow-sure. (Grabs for one)
Tree-Hey! those are Mine!!! How would you like it if somebody just came and randomly decided to grab your coconuts? huh?
Dorothy-he he he he… he said coconuts… he he he
Frodo-You said coconuts too….
Dorothy-ha ha, you said coconuts too. he he he
Tree-I'll give you three seconds to get this idiot away from me…
Dorothy-laughs, giggles, etc…
Tree-That's it. throws coconuts at scarecrow.
Scarecrow-Ow ow ow ahh oh the pain, agh
Dorothy goes for coconuts runs into tin man
Dorothy-Blank stare……….. look! A man made out of tin!!!
Tin Man-Oil Can! Oil Can!
Dorothy-What?
Tin Man-OIL CAN! you blonde
Dorothy-OH oil can. Oh well…

(Witch appears)

Witch-(coughs) I have to get that fog machine fixed.
Everyone-Ahh it's the witch
Dorothy-Who?
Witch-It's me, I'll get you my precious and your little hobbit too
Frodo-How does it know
Witch-(Cackles) leaves the scene
Scarecrow-that was pretty much pointless
Dorothy-Oh well.

(Tone, harmonica, too low too high just right)
Dorothy-Hey guys this forest is so utterly terrifying and opaque… it makes me so… what's the word, oh yah scared.
scarecrow-Yah, in this forest I hear there are.. terrible running ducks, horrible flying monkeys and yaks
Dorothy-my oh
#Everyone-running ducks, flying monkeys, and yaks
Dorothy-my oh#X3
@Lion-(roars)
Frodo-(feetle position)@ X5
Dorothy-(screams after done) It's a lion (hit lion)
Lion-Ow Ow What is your problem Blonde
Dorothy-Why does everybody keep commenting on my hair… anyway say sorry you, you, you… Follow the yellow brick road, follow the yellow brick road
Frodo-are you kidding
Lion-So, where are you guys…
Scarecrow-Don't!
Lion-Going?
Dorothy-I don't know.
Frodo-three strikes your out we're leaving her.
Dorothy-eww baseball! (walks off)
Frodo-agh
(Harmonica, Jeopardy, realizes, Tone) off to see that one guy

Trent-After they exited the forest, they started to frolic through the flowers which the pollen was sniffed and they were immediately put to sleep by the scent And yes the witch did come to save them not the freaky one in the forest but the really nice one with a pretty pink dress and some go- go boots that lives her poor pathetic life tending to baby sized adults who sing like Michael Jackson in his prime.
Dorothy-Oh my gosh! look guys!! it's so pretty
scarecrow-Let's ring the bell!!!
Both make loud dinging noises
Dorothy-Ding ding ding ding!!! What?
blank stare from frodo
Guard-Eh Hello??? what are you here for?
frodo-Not again…
dorothy-uhhh I don't know…?
Frodo-We need to see the wizard… I uhh have something for him.
Guard-Certainly mate!!!! I'll take ya to see ‘im right away

Wizard-Welcome! state your business
Frodo-I've brought you this!!! the ring of power!!!!
wizard-well if this midget has a reason… why are you four here?
both-I don't know?
Logical-Master

Pro

I strongly affirm the resolution which states "This script should be made into a feature length film."

Now given that Mr. Perry is the instigator, the means the burden of proof belongs to him. Ladies and gentleman, please note that he has provided no arguments to defend his position, thus has not upheld his stance. Even if he manages to refute my arguments, you will still have no reason to vote in favor of him unless he provides arguments for his side. This is because merely refuting my arguments and claiming he won would be committing the negative evidence fallacy (more on that, if requested in the comment section or by my opponent). In addition, you should immediately consider voting against the instigator for conduct since he has refused to give an argument in his first round.

In addition, please note that this debate concerns a feature LENGTH film. In other words, we're merely discussing a film which has the length of a feature film (it doesn't necessarily have to be a feature film). For more info, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Without further ado, let us begin:

CONTENTION #1: This script could easily serve to be the script of a "Porno".

1) Now if you aren't familiar with pornographic films, allow me to fill you in on one common trait which they possess: Pornographic films generally don't have a sensical plot, given that the main purpose of the film is simply nothing other than the pornography. Individuals (generally men) are more interested in "wrenching out their housepipe" than they are in the story. It's like Call of Duty 4. Gamers don't give too much of a crap about this storyline which they've seen a thousand times before; gamers are simply interested in the gameplay.

2) There's a lot of potential in making this film a porno.

A) Observe the following lines created by my sophisticated opponent and note how they all include sexual innuendo:

"Tree-Hey! those are Mine!!! How would you like it if somebody just came and randomly decided to grab your coconuts? huh?

COMMENT: What? If somebody just CAME and randomly decided to GRAB your COCUNUTS? I'd say that somebody would like it alot.

"Scarecrow-Ow ow ow ahh oh the pain, agh"

COMMENT: Pretty self explanatory.

"Dorothy goes for coconuts runs into tin man"

COMMENT: Dorothy seems pretty desperate to get to those cocunuts. Even enough for her to make the move and RUN into the tin man (can you say "cow girl": http://en.wikipedia.org... ). One might even say she was amorous.

"Dorothy-Blank stare……….. look! A man made out of tin!!!
Tin Man-Oil Can! Oil Can!
Dorothy-What?
Tin Man-OIL CAN! you blonde
Dorothy-OH oil can. Oh well…"

COMMENT:

Oil = innuendo for Seman
Tin = A clever way of suggesting that this character is "hard."

I could go on, but these are sufficient to establish my point.

B) Wizard of Oz/Lord of the Rings crossover porno film? C'mon, this hasn't even been done before. Ergo, this film would be more or less original (which is good for a film to push towards).

C) The hard core fans of both series will have something to pleasure themselves to when they see their favorite characters doing that which they were allowed to do on the big screen.

CONTENTION #2: If not a porno film, then this can be a parody film. Indeed as it is often the case that a movie manages to be successful due to being so bad that it's good. This list of films and comments on said films is a good example of what I am talking about: http://www.webomatica.com...

If this atrocious script were to hit the big screen, it could easily be a smashing success (and contrary to the previous movies I listed, more people would be likely to see it due the higher level of familiarity with the films "Wizard of OZ" and "Lord of the Rings"

Thus, for the reasons listed above, I believe I've upheld my stance so far that the script mentioned in the first round ought to be made into a feature length film. Due to the vagueness of the topic, I will need some clarification before I elaborate on these arguments in more detail as well as provide a few additional ones. Thus, that will do it for now.
Debate Round No. 1
CoronerPerry

Con

CoronerPerry forfeited this round.
Logical-Master

Pro

CON forfeits. Thus, he drops my entire case. Extend my arguments to the next round.
Debate Round No. 2
CoronerPerry

Con

CoronerPerry forfeited this round.
Logical-Master

Pro

He forfeits, ergo he drops, ergo I extend. :D
Debate Round No. 3
23 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by knick-knack 8 years ago
knick-knack
Not based on LD format.
Posted by Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
Speaking of those wikipedia links, you should put an advisery or something on those "adult" links
Posted by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
Joe Voting as a Cleaner

Conduct - PRO - CON forfeited all but the first round.

English - PRO - I understand CON was trying to be funny, but I expect a little better than what he wrote.

Argument - PRO - CON provided 0 arguments; PRO provided two.

Sources - PRO - CON provided 0 sources; PRO provided three (though I dislike the two from wikipedia)
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
"
I completely agree with you there (at least in terms of this discussion). In this debate, the instigator proposed that the claim "idea X is false" is indeed true. The only counter you've made to this fact is that the instigator merely posited the claim, however, given careful observation of the term "posit," we learn that it is synonymous to propose (propose as in proposition) as suggested by this highly credible dictionary: http://www.merriam-webster.com...;

Perhaps I misworded... he did not "posit" the claim as such, he mandated that his opponent be one who defended the claim in question (the claim that X is true). The resolution does not state x is false...
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
Don't let this debate sway your thoughts of the general voters on this site. A troll with multiple accounts has voted down all of my debates (as well as other members). Otherwise, my win ratio would be MUCH higher at the moment. :D
Posted by Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
How can CoronerPerry be winning?! He forefitted all but the first round! The only expenation I can think of is that the people who voted con are IDIOTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Posted by funnybrad333 8 years ago
funnybrad333
In LD both debaters provide cases, and thus both are trying to fulfill their burdens of proof...
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
Oh yeah, and keep in mind that the other renderings of the BOF are only meant to apply to competitive debates. They have no bearing elsewhere (for reasons which I hope are obvious).
Posted by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
Your argument:

1) This site is based off of the LD format.
2) In LD format, the instigator possesses the burden of proof.
3) Therefore, the burden of proof belongs to the affirmative side, not the instigator.

RE #1: False dichotomy. This site isn't based on LD format. Do you see a cross examination feature? Why is it that both debater's get an equal number of rounds? Clearly, this site doesn't uphold the LD debate format moniker.

RE #2: Not necessarily, assuming you manage to convince your judge of other renderings concerning the burden of proof (example: that both debaters are merely obligated to prove which stance is more likely correct, thus have an equal burden to uphold), but since this is not necessarily an argument that concerns this discussion (as I didn't advocate this during our debate nor during any other area of the comment section), I shall agree to this claim as I'd rather not drive this discussion elsewhere.

RE #3:Since #1 fails, the whole thing falls apart. Although just for the heck of things, I'll go ahead and point out that your argument is also an appeal to tradition ("because it has been a custom in LD debate, it is the correct way of doing things"), thus further has no logical basis.
Posted by CoronerPerry 8 years ago
CoronerPerry
this site is based off of the LD format debate. therefore, like Lincoln-Douglas, it is the affirmation who has the burdon of proof. not the instigator.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Tatarize 8 years ago
Tatarize
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by maddoxparadox 8 years ago
maddoxparadox
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by draxxt 8 years ago
draxxt
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 8 years ago
PoeJoe
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Killer542 8 years ago
Killer542
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Littleweasle 8 years ago
Littleweasle
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 8 years ago
Logical-Master
CoronerPerryLogical-MasterTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07