Mike JM Hates Trolls. Who doesn't?

Usually I'd bust out the Webster's Dictionary for something like this, but it appears Urban Dictionary is the only source for a proper definition:

troll |trōl|
noun
"One who purposely and deliberately (that purpose usually being self-amusement) starts an argument in a manner which attacks others on a forum without in any way listening to the arguments proposed by his or her peers. He will spark of such an argument via the use of ad hominem attacks (i.e. 'you're nothing but a fanboy' is a popular phrase) with no substance or relevence to back them up as well as straw man arguments, which he uses to simply avoid addressing the essence of the issue."

I encounter these little bastards every so often on the net, and they are (no doubt) the lowest of the human species. Seriously, think about it: let's take some person who hates Kevin Smith, so they search him online just to post "he's a hack" on IMDB or YouTube. Most rationally thinking people who hate somebody just don't look them up on the internet. Why do they do it? It's simple. It's more than the fact that they have no life. They want to feel like somebody important. So they choose to take down somebody (usually somebody better than them) and try to provoke them or their followers. It's out of sheer weakness.

Most of these people are young teens, who love to look for a fight. They usually fail to practice even remotely decent spelling or grammar, which hint that they lack education.

I have encountered a troll today on my page on Spill.com. I posted a blog last evening, on all blog pages, about Tommy Wiseau's The Room. It was a review praising the film for the fact that it's so poorly made that it draws a big audience, and I respect the film for that. Anyone who read my article knows that. Well, I check back often to see if I'm getting any responses. My Sit Down Shut Up blog got a good number of responses on Spill. Here comes a user named "No Thanks" and it's just a paragraph that explains the following:

**My film, Doing God's Work, looks like shit.

**I cannot trash The Room as I'm worse than Tommy Wiseau.

**My girlfriend is ugly and so am I. Not only that, but I'm fat and awkward.

Now, I'll be the first to admit: Doing God's Work is not a great-looking film. I never paraded myself as a visionary, as I am still learning a few things. Hence me taking classes. The reason it's shot so cheap looking is because it's on a cheap camera. I used to have a great camera, but it got ruined, then those twits at Circuit City lost it. Their way of saying sorry? "Hey, Mr. McAllister, have this cheap-ass camera on the house." It's good enough til I get some reasonable income going to buy an HD- Camera. I'm making the best of it, and I do notice it's flaws. They can be seen from space.

As for for the overall look: I did not have time to get a lighting set-up outdoors because, technically, we weren't supposed to be shooting outdoors. We had no time to rent out lights so we went with the best we can. We had little time to do so as it was finals week. You know, though? Looks aside, I made a decent-ass film. It looks better than Death of a Film did, which suffered from continuity errors up the ying-yang. I'm still learning how to shoot stuff well I've gotten better over the years. Soon I will have the equipment to make stuff look gorgeous. What I focused on what acting.

This person pretty much told me the acting was inferior to that of The Room. Oh, blow me. I work with actors who gave good fucking performances. Aaron Norcom is a hell of an actor for his age, and Alan did better than I expected. Lena and Wil joined the cast as a favor and they didn't half-ass it either. No stale deliveries in the dialogue here. Point is may not look as good as The Room did. I didn't shoot it on HD cameras. Difference is, though: Wiseau's DP had his shots out of focus to begin. I was stuck with a shitty-ass camera whose auto-focus goes in an out, even after I turn it off.

At least I try to make decent stuff, and my work isn't smug and self-indulgent like Wiseau. Yes, I've done a short where I was the starring role and my acting sucked. But you know what? The film isn't even online. Why? Because of that, and the editing sucked. You want to see bad filmmaking? See my first film. Everyone's first film of any sort doesn't look good. It's a fact. This was 2005 when I made that picture. It's 2009 now, and if you play Not Without My Moose then Doing God's Work...yeah I've improved. Big time. Imagine in another four years.

So, really, there isn't much reason to go after my stuff and compare it to The Room. I never said "Oh, I can so make a better movie than Tommy Wiseau." Show me in the article where I remotely compare myself to Wiseau. I don't compare myself to anyone. I'm "inspired" by directors, or "influenced," but there's a big different between being influenced by someone and comparing one to one's self. But this troll went to extreme measures to blast my fat ass back to the Stone Age (and fail trying), so I wouldn't expect him to intellectually comprehend that.

Next on the guy's agenda: my weight, and my girlfriend. Seriously. What the hell does that have to do with anything? That's such a childish way to go: go for the gut. It's like republicans attacking Michael Moore for his weight. You can't do it and be the better man. This is where he deviates from the essence of the issue.

"Gee, buddy, you got me there. I'm fat and weird, so I have no business expressing an opinion as it's so obsolete." Please. Fuck off.

Who goes after a guy's girlfriend? Let me rephrase that: what kind of MAN (adult, human being, etc) goes after a guy's girlfriend in a message board post? Nobody. Nobody who's adult, but he's obviously not an adult. Calling my girlfriend is not only uncalled for, but inaccurate. I never go "oh, I'm dating the hottest piece of ass on the planet." What my MySpace page and Spill photos indicate is: "this is my girlfriend. I love her and she is very important to me". I know my girlfriend is beautiful, and I've been told that by so many others. Not once have people gone "Shit you can do better." It's always been "Wow, she's cute! Congratulations" (which is another way of saying "Damn, dude, she's better looking than that slag you spent 2 1/2 years with). This guy clearly has no girlfriend, and if he does, she's probably no looker. Hell, he's from Greenville PA (my hometown). How many lookers are there? Very few.

This is what is the most pathetic about the whole thing: this person went to great lengths to bash me. Look at his screen name: "No Thanks." Usually, Spill will put out a person's full name, and that is his "full name" according to the profile. No Thanks. First name: No. Last name: Thanks. There is such a minimal amount of information on this page. Why? He wants no one to know who he really is, like most trolls, and it could indicate he has no plans to stay on the site for too long. He profile has nothing else. No picture, no playlist, no survey answers, nothing. Just "No Thanks, Greenville, PA, Male." That's it. Signing up for a site takes some time (not a long time, but not worth taking just to flame somebody).

This person defines pathetic. Chances are this is some kid who slacked off in GHS, probably hates the principal just because he got in trouble, and probably gets high on a regular basis. Growing up in Greenville for 18 years of my life, I know the type.

He is clearly looking to feel better about himself and flames somebody from town who is clearly better than he. I'm not going "I'm better than all ya'll. You don't fuck wit (sic) me." But when it boils down to it: I am better than him. I've graduated from GHS, left town and have been doing pretty well for himself. I'm writing for a paper, been promoted to manager of a radio station, and is actively working on a portfolio for all forms of media so he can find work anywhere. Be it in film or journalism or screenwriting.

What's this kid doing with his life? Trolling.

I know what some of you are going to say: "Your'e firing back at him, so you're not being any better than him. Just forget it." Normally, I'd agree. But this is no case of arguing on the internet trolling. Like I frequently say (and many of my fellow net nerds know) it's like "running in the Special Olympics. Even if you win, you're still a retard." What this is, is pointing out how pathetic a troll is. I'm not the one failing to stay the course while trying to argue. I'm pointing out what many frequent web surfers are thinking: "Why are people so pathetic that they have to take so much time to search somebody they hate, to bash them?" What do they have to gain? It's not going to improve their lives. I don't go for personal blows, like "you're fat and awkward, so your opinions mean nothing and your mom/girlfriend/wife (in Greenville, it's sometimes all the same person) is fat/dumb/a slut."

Seriously, why do people do this? I get criticism. One of my ambitions is to be a critic, for Christ's sake. I know I'm not that great a filmmaker, but I have been getting better over the years. Next year, I'll have sound nailed and lighting...but I digress. I get that the internet is a place for one to post their opinions. But this guy is not doing it right. He's taking time out just to go "yeah...and you suck. Go hang yourself." Seriously, people should grow up. I'm pro-internet critics, but I hate trolls, like many of us do. They're sad sad, pathetic little bastards with a smug self of self-rightiousness when they haven't accomplished anything.

If you have nothing better to do than flame on the internet: you fail.