everybody likes to argue about their FAVORITE MOVIE!!!!

I find the Pro's use of logic kind of funny. He offers four instances of me apologizing for using opinions in this argument when i could have used facts, and he tries to use twist those statements into implying that he was right when that isnt true at all. The first point is so vague in what he is referring to it doesnt make sense. In his second point he again takes my words out of context to try to prove a point. Again i apologized because I had used opinion to make a point when i could have used facts to prove a point. The Pro saying that such a move makes him automatically correct is hilarious.In his third point the Pro once again takes words out of context to try to say he was right. I was agreeing with him on the grounds that the nomination process for academy awards could be flawed... In Point four he points out that gross profits do not play a factor in nominations for academy awards... I find it almost sad that the Pro has grown so desperate that he is trying to take advantage of voters by trying to trick them into thinking I am conceding every argument to him..... I am not furious at my opponent, I am just growing tired of having to explain every little thing to him because if i dont he will take my words out of context and try to reinforce why he is right. He even attacks how i worded the opening of the debate to imply that he is right before the debate even started....Let me take this last argument to summarize the Pro's catastrophic argument and my responses to each oneFirst argument - He feels that Red Dawn should have won because the actors in the cast are very famous and successful and the director of the film has released many successful moviesMy argument - I felt the cast did not perform well in the movie, the plot of the movie was too unrealistic, and the director only had 2 commercially successful films even though the Pro claimed he had 4 (2 of which he named he didnt actually direct) His second argument - The fact that the movie was a very unrealistic representation of how a communist invasion of America doesnt matter because Lord of the Rings is unrealistic and that won best picture. He also states how I shouldnt use opinions to reinforce my arguments. Stating how the nomination process may be flawed and that gross profits do not impact which film is better.My argument - I apologize for using opinions and so offer facts to reinforce every point that i made in my original argument. I then use the Pro's own evidence and use it to suggest why it may nullify his own arguments.His third argument - He attacks my apologies for using opinions and says how its a sign of weakness and implies that the events in Red Dawn were very likely by comparing it to 9/11. He also argues why the fact that his own arguments were opinionated does not matter because I did the same thing originally but does not offer facts to reinforce his previous arguments like I did.My argument - I clarify my points to help the Pro avoid confusion and proceed on attacking his tactics of taking my words out of context to imply that he is 100% right in every way. I then elaborately explain why i think Amadeus deserved to win Best Picture and not Red Dawn.His fourth argument - He attacks my use of adjectives by saying that i am growing hostile, lists four points of how I allegedly agree with him and his entire argument, and convinces himself that I am furious with him. He then concludes by stating I have not given sufficient evidence of why I think Red Dawn did not win best picture with yet another reference to the Lord of the Rings. My argument - I further clarify my points to help the Pro avoid even more confusion and give a final summary of why Amadeus won Best Picture and not Red DawnThe reason why both Amadeus and Lord of the Rings Return of the King won Best picture is because, both films have very well organized plots, both films have very detailed character development over the course of the movie, both movies have a cast who portray their characters very well in the film, it evokes deep emotions from those watching the film, an amazing script, and perhaps most importantly because both movies had endings that draw a deep level of satisfaction from the audience The reason I put that in bold is because that is ultimately how a movie wins Best Picture. Both Amadeus and L.O.T.R. won best picture because they all succeed very well in all of these categories. Red Dawn on the other hand has a poorly organized plot, there is no character development, and the movie has an ending that draws no satisfaction from an audience. That is why Red Dawn should not have won Best Picture in 1985.