If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Washington Times)   Reviewer: Sam Raimi's new Evil Dead is going out in wide release with an R rating is an example of just how far our society has gone off the rails and come to accept bloodletting as entertainment. DO YOU EVEN REMEMBER THE EIGHTIES?   (washingtontimes.com) divider line 102
    More: Silly, Sam Raimi, entertainments, unrated, Fede Alvarez, nail gun, color commentator, running time, ancient Romans  
•       •       •

1741 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 08 Apr 2013 at 11:29 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



102 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-08 12:28:29 PM

gunga galunga: FTA: One might expect that with 30 more years of life experience, mainstream acceptance and a longtime marriage with five children, Mr. Raimi would look back on that movie as an early aberration

Sure. If one was a farking idiot that doesn't deserve to have a byline in a newspaper.

A person with a functioning brain would expect that Raimi would look back on that movie as the start of a still popular franchise and the beginning of a long and successful career

Farking idiot.

/didn't bother to read past that part
//that much stupid can be potentially harmfull


Sam Raimi was 22 when he made Evil Dead.  22.  I wonder what the writer was doing when he was 22.

If you were 22 and created a movie that because a cult classic and kicked off your career as an A-list director, you would look back at that movie with pride.
 
2013-04-08 12:28:53 PM

Techhell: This is a Rant about Lost


Fark you.
I loved the ending and thought it fit nicely.
People who rant about the ending of LOST are the same exact type of people who rant about Firefly being cancelled so long ago.

/yep, I teared up.
//went out and bought all seasons on Bluray.
 
2013-04-08 12:35:03 PM

Galileo's Daughter: Do we as a society accept bloodletting as entertainment?  No, but a subset of the population does (c/f the Saw, Friday the 13th, and Hostel franchises).  Let them watch their movies, and we'll all go see Jurassic Park in 3D.


And cheer as the lawyer is eaten.
 
2013-04-08 12:38:42 PM

gunga galunga: FTA: One might expect that with 30 more years of life experience, mainstream acceptance and a longtime marriage with five children, Mr. Raimi would look back on that movie as an early aberration

Sure. If one was a farking idiot that doesn't deserve to have a byline in a newspaper.

A person with a functioning brain would expect that Raimi would look back on that movie as the start of a still popular franchise and the beginning of a long and successful career

Farking idiot.

/didn't bother to read past that part
//that much stupid can be potentially harmfull


This is a writer employed and paid by a dangerous cult. Any integrity he may have had went out the window a long time ago.
 
2013-04-08 12:38:48 PM

AeAe: Raug the Dwarf: AeAe: bborchar: Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Eh, it was actually pretty tame by modern horror standards.

/also it sucked

I'll just stick with the original.  I laughed so hard when watching it, I don't think any remake could top it.

If by "the original", you mean Evil Dead 2.  Evil Dead 1 was a straight horror film.  I don't recall any funny moments there.

This remake had no humorous moments... except for the duct tape.

The first Evil Dead was one of the scariest movies I've ever seen. I haven't watched in a long time, so I don't know if it holds up or not.  Just the sense of dread and utter despair throughout the whole thing and the jump scares.  Even the FX were good, if I remember right.  Evil Dead 2 was black comedy/horror.  Still some crazy, scary parts, but a lot more laughs too.

I do want to see this one though.  May have to take a trip to the theatre.

See it.  I'm pretty desensitized to horror films but I found myself tensed up for most of this movie.  Effects are top notch and the acting was good.

There's a bunch of people in this thread that didn't like it, but I think that's subjective.  See it and make up your own mind.


I liked it as well. It was exactly what I had hoped a remake of Evil Dead would be: 90 minutes of intense splatter gore, plenty of nods to the original, but still wise enough to know better not to include an Ash character not played by Bruce Campbell.
 
2013-04-08 12:39:46 PM

gittlebass: we don't let bloodletting as entertainment??? did he not see the passion of the christ?


My girlfriend was working box office the day a church bus full of kids rolled up to watch TPotC. The manager had to leave the lobby to laugh while she turned them away.

She told the bus driver that no, he and the pastor are NOT the legal guardians of 50 kids and if they wanted to bring elementary schoolers to see that movie they could rent out the whole movie theatre for a private show and hire all the staff for the day.

/They did.
//Then got mad when we didn't have "the English version".
 
2013-04-08 12:41:00 PM

Zombie DJ: Techhell: This is a Rant about Lost

Fark you.
I loved the ending and thought it fit nicely.
People who rant about the ending of LOST are the same exact type of people who rant about Firefly being cancelled so long ago.

/yep, I teared up.
//went out and bought all seasons on Bluray.


You're why we can't have good television shows outside of HBO.
 
2013-04-08 12:42:20 PM
I wasn't so much bothered by the gore as I am bothered by the fact that we're giving the time of day to a review I stopped reading the moment the article stated that they were surprised that Mr Raimi would want to make such a sadistic film since he is a father and "patriotic American"
 
2013-04-08 12:47:09 PM
People are forgetting the important thing about this movie. Does Jane Levy show her boobies. I was promised boobies.
 
2013-04-08 12:52:37 PM

Mr Guy:   Humans want to either be repulsed by violence to experience it vicariously and feel safer from it, or they want to laugh at violence to desensitize it and claim power over it.   Only psychopaths aren't rewarded by their brains for seeing violence and either fleeing from it or confronting it.  That's more or less how our brain chemistry works.  Of course we exploit that for profit.

AeAe: Also, remember this is not real.  Movies are fantasy which transports us from the daily mundane.  We know when we go to see a horror/gore movie that no one was killed, no one was hurt, no matter how realistic it appears.

There were many decapitations in the movie - self-inflicted and otherwise - and the characters kept chugging along while missing an arm.  If that were to happen in RL, that person would immediately pass out from shock and die from blood loss.  Not in the movies!


I guess the question would then become, can you watch too much violence and become desensitized to where you can't separate fantasy from reality?

DeathByGeekSquad: nd cheer as the lawyer is eaten.


Best. Lawyer joke. Ever.
 
2013-04-08 12:57:07 PM

Saiga410: About 90 percent of the new film's running time consists of finding brutal and bloody ways to kill a person, including shotgun blasts, nail guns, broken mirror shards, strangulations, drowning, electrocution, burning and live burial. I haven't even mentioned the dungeon full of rotting cat corpses hanging from the ceiling, the dog that has its throat slashed, the moving tree branches that violate a woman (don't ask), and the numerous forced or accidental amputations along the way.


Wait, I thought the tree rape was out of this one?

/I will probably rent this. I cannot get my wife to watch TWD let alone something a little scary.


*** SPOILER ***
.
.
.
.
.
.
It's not the tree that rapes her. The tree ties her up and stretches her out spread eagle while a Deadite vomits out some black slug-like thing which crawls up her legs and slithers into her.

Good times.
 
2013-04-08 12:58:15 PM

Contrabulous Flabtraption: The Stealth Hippopotamus: So I guess those people never saw RoboCop.

I still refuse to watch that movie again. I saw it when I was 12-ish and the scene of Murphy getting blown to bits bothers me to this day (I'm 34)


The movie "House" terrified me when I caught a glimpse as a child. Same with Child's Play. Then I went and watched them as an adult and realized the cheesey, over-the-top effects and wondered how could I ever have been afraid of that.

Grow up and watch the movie again. Face your fears. I bet it's a lot less graphic and traumatic than you remember it being.
 
2013-04-08 01:00:50 PM

moonage daydream: Same with Child's Play.


Child's Play farking terrified me as a kid. To the point where I told my uncle I hated him and would never speak to him again after giving me it on VHS as a joke Christmas present. I didn't even want the video near me.

Now I think it's funny, but yea, I had an irrational fear of that damn doll.
 
2013-04-08 01:02:50 PM

Galileo's Daughter: Do we as a society accept bloodletting as entertainment?  No, but a subset of the population does (c/f the Saw, Friday the 13th, and Hostel franchises).  Let them watch their movies, and we'll all go see Jurassic Park in 3D.


Please do not put Saw and Friday the 13th in the same category. You are a bad person and you should feel bad.
 
2013-04-08 01:03:31 PM

movieman_1979: I wasn't so much bothered by the gore as I am bothered by the fact that we're giving the time of day to a review I stopped reading the moment the article stated that they were surprised that Mr Raimi would want to make such a sadistic film since he is a father and "patriotic American"


I thought you were embellishing on that last part. But, no, I went back and TFA actually does say that.

Although, what is more patriotic than giving the American public what they want. Many US citizens saw it this weekend and were entertained (well, maybe not most of the people in this thread). And Sam Raimi was responsible for that.

God bless America!
 
2013-04-08 01:05:46 PM
And it's fair to ask Mr. Raimi why, as a father - and, by past media accounts, a patriotic American

Wait, what?

The article author:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh2sWSVRrmo
 
2013-04-08 01:12:13 PM

Galileo's Daughter: can you watch too much violence and become desensitized to where you can't separate fantasy from reality?


Unless you have severe mental issues, I don't think this is a problem.

But it not just movies, right?  You see this in games which adds a layer of interaction to the experience.  You are actually participating in the "violence".  And game engines are so good that it's very realistic.
 
2013-04-08 01:13:33 PM

gunga galunga: Saiga410: About 90 percent of the new film's running time consists of finding brutal and bloody ways to kill a person, including shotgun blasts, nail guns, broken mirror shards, strangulations, drowning, electrocution, burning and live burial. I haven't even mentioned the dungeon full of rotting cat corpses hanging from the ceiling, the dog that has its throat slashed, the moving tree branches that violate a woman (don't ask), and the numerous forced or accidental amputations along the way.


Wait, I thought the tree rape was out of this one?

/I will probably rent this. I cannot get my wife to watch TWD let alone something a little scary.

*** SPOILER ***
.
.
.
.
.
.
It's not the tree that rapes her. The tree ties her up and stretches her out spread eagle while a Deadite vomits out some black slug-like thing which crawls up her legs and slithers into her.

Good times.


Wasn't that Deadite also Mia?  I thought it was a like a double.
 
2013-04-08 01:21:06 PM

AeAe: Wasn't that Deadite also Mia? I thought it was a like a double.


I think that was supposed to be a different girl. She was played by a different actress anyway.
 
2013-04-08 01:25:05 PM

AeAe: Wasn't that Deadite also Mia? I thought it was a like a double.


It sure looked like her but it was a different actress. IMDB has her credited as "Abomination Mia".
 
2013-04-08 01:26:57 PM
All that reviewer did is make me want to go see it more than I previously felt.
 
2013-04-08 01:26:59 PM

Techhell: /sigh. Troll fed.


I kinda resent being deemed a troll on account the obvious troll was so obvious it was obviously not a troll.
 
2013-04-08 01:27:32 PM
What the hell is he talking about?!?!  The originals were Rated X!!!

I believe they're currently listed as unrated and NC-17 under the new rules. But when they were released theatrically, they got X ratings, and they were AWESOME to see in theaters.
 
2013-04-08 01:29:35 PM
Because you mouth breathing Christian farkers won't let us show tits, ass, pussy and cocks. It sets your Neo-Puritan hearts all a flutter.
 
2013-04-08 01:36:19 PM

hubiestubert:  Pretty dang much.

It's no "I Spit on Your Grave" but yeah, it's The Evil Dead. Did folks think that it was about sunshine and kittens? It was a film that had its roots in the splatter gore of a LOT of movies previous. Friday the 13th, Halloween, and a brazillion Full Moon movies. Cripes folks, if you don't want to see it, then don't go. No one makes you, you know...



Well, it's not like the author was saying movies like that should be banned, the author was just saying they didn't think it should be rated R. Whether we agree or not I think that's an entirely reasonable argument to make. They were saying that theatrical release horror movies by and large have gotten more graphic and explicit over the years, and what would have once been rated the equivalent of an NC-17 is now being dropped down to an R. I also think that's probably pretty reasonable to argue as well.

Myself? Ehhhhh... I'm torn on these in general. I'd personally like to see the ratings for gorefests adjusted upwards too. Put a couple of dongs in there and it's instant NC-17. But if someone is tortured to death these days you get an R. That to me is a pretty sad indictment of our backwards views on sex and violence, where the depictions of perfectly natural naked human bodies or human sexual activity is apparently somehow more objectionable to us as a society then sadistically murdering someone. So I'd like to see the two reversed... ease up on the ratings for sex/nudity and raise the ratings for violence. We'll still be able to see the movies just fine if we're so inclined.

I do worry about the desensitizing influence of ever more and more sadistic entertainment on our society. Yes, most people can tell the difference between reality and fiction. Yes, the few that can't are going to be beyond reason in general. I agree with all of that - but I don't see a contradiction with worrying that increasing levels of violence and sadism in our popular entertainment might very well desensitize us to some degree to violence and sadism. It might not result in causing more people to go out and commit more crimes, but I don't think it's unreasonable to suspect it might make us somewhat less sensitive to violence and abuses we see occuring and might otherwise have confronted. Maybe...

And even if today's levels of sadism won't have an effect on us as a people, are we confident that there's no level at which case it will? So maybe today's sadism doesn't reach the bar, but perhaps in a decade or two the sadism in our media will have gotten even more pronounced and then DOES start to have an effect on how we act...
 
2013-04-08 01:40:41 PM

ZeroCorpse: What the hell is he talking about?!?!  The originals were Rated X!!!

I believe they're currently listed as unrated and NC-17 under the new rules. But when they were released theatrically, they got X ratings, and they were AWESOME to see in theaters.



If you RTFA that was precisely the point the author was making. The new one is more sadistic then the original, but the remake was rated an R. They thought it should have been rated NC-17, and were lamenting the fact that we've become inured enough to these movies that in general what once was an NC-17 is now an R.
 
2013-04-08 01:47:25 PM
As a fan of horror movies, and having seen all the Saws, Hostels, Texas Chainsaw Massacres, most of the recent remakes and almost all the classics, I was sitting through Evil Dead wondering how the Hell they got an 'R'. Even the so-called "torture porn" movies make some specific cutaways where Evil Dead just goes and shows limbs getting ripped apart with geysers of blood. I suspect they did the South Park thing where the original cut is so over-the-top that when the MPAA requested cuts, the creators actually got something close to what they wanted anyway.
 
2013-04-08 01:47:50 PM

Altair: Please do not put Saw and Friday the 13th in the same category. You are a bad person and you should feel bad.


Why?  Both franchises could reasonably be described as "bloodletting for entertainment."

AeAe: Unless you have severe mental issues, I don't think this is a problem.

But it not just movies, right?  You see this in games which adds a layer of interaction to the experience.  You are actually participating in the "violence".  And game engines are so good that it's very realistic.


Movies, music, games, culture..you can't really escape it.  You might not become a psychopath, but I would think that repeated exposure to such entertainment would eventually have some sort of desensitizing effect, like mongobiohazard mentioned.
 
2013-04-08 02:05:28 PM

The Stealth Hippopotamus: So I guess those people never saw RoboCop.


Came to say something like this, but these people probably think the dystopian RoboCop future with an international conglomerate buying a US city in order to rehab it is the ultimate in bootstrappy conservatism.

OCP was made out the be the bad guy, but really, they were just trying to help.
 
2013-04-08 02:05:36 PM

Slaves2Darkness: Because you mouth breathing Christian farkers won't let us show tits, ass, pussy and cocks. It sets your Neo-Puritan hearts all a flutter.


As is often said in these threads when this topic comes up....

Hammer a six-inch nail into a woman: Rated R
Hammer a six-inch penis into a woman: Rated NC-17
Hammer a six-inch nail into a board with your penis: Deborah Foreman
 
2013-04-08 02:20:04 PM

gittlebass: we don't let bloodletting as entertainment??? did he not see the passion of the christ?

That doesn't count because Jesus.
 
2013-04-08 02:24:05 PM

Disposable Rob: As a fan of horror movies, and having seen all the Saws, Hostels, Texas Chainsaw Massacres, most of the recent remakes and almost all the classics, I was sitting through Evil Dead wondering how the Hell they got an 'R'. Even the so-called "torture porn" movies make some specific cutaways where Evil Dead just goes and shows limbs getting ripped apart with geysers of blood. I suspect they did the South Park thing where the original cut is so over-the-top that when the MPAA requested cuts, the creators actually got something close to what they wanted anyway.


I noticed that the picture was dimmed during some of the grislier bits. Scenes like the one woman peeling of pieces of her face with a glass shard or the woman slicing her tongue with a box cutter were noticeably brighter in the red band trailer. No doubt that was an MPAA demand.
 
2013-04-08 02:24:38 PM

mongbiohazard: ZeroCorpse: What the hell is he talking about?!?!  The originals were Rated X!!!

I believe they're currently listed as unrated and NC-17 under the new rules. But when they were released theatrically, they got X ratings, and they were AWESOME to see in theaters.


If you RTFA that was precisely the point the author was making. The new one is more sadistic then the original, but the remake was rated an R. They thought it should have been rated NC-17, and were lamenting the fact that we've become inured enough to these movies that in general what once was an NC-17 is now an R.


Oh.
. . .
 Nevermind.
 
2013-04-08 02:33:17 PM
Put me down as one who didn't love it.

Wasn't horrible, just wasn't great.

Too many things just didn't make sense to me, even though I knew why they were doing it. **small spoilers**

1. Cut off a limb, you're gonna pass out
2. Nail guns normally can't fire without it being depressed on a surface.
3. If you shoot a plastic jug of gas, it will not explode
4. Hmmmmm, grab a chain saw that hasn't been started in YEARS and has no gas, or a machete?
5. Top of jeep falling on your hand on a wet, soggy surface wouldn't pin like that.

Etc etc

I know how nit picky that is, but I really want a horror movie that feels real.

Maybe this is a dumb thing to say, but I actually thought the first Paranormal Activity was the scariest movie I had seen in a long time. Some of the things creeped me out, and your house makes plenty of noises that can immediately be attributed to a ghost after seeing the movie.

I don't know... Maybe violence just isn't scary any more.
 
2013-04-08 02:34:58 PM

Galileo's Daughter: I guess the question would then become, can you watch too much violence and become desensitized to where you can't separate fantasy from reality?


Best evidence is no, as long as you're older than about three, people react more sympathetically to actual victims of violence when they are desensitized to it by showing you a lot of it.   People actually form bonds with people they see in pain, which is why when you want to teach someone to brutalize another person, you first have to seperate them from the results of their actions and teach them to stop thinking of people as people, but as some other derogatory label.  If you want to brainwash someone into thinking it's okay to hurt someone, you show them that person as a powerful threat, not as a pitiable victim.  In horror, there is release that comes from identifying with the victim, and then being relieved you are not the victim.  That's essentially practicing empathy, not psychotic behavior.

Yes, boys especially like to act tough by empathizing with the killers, and reanact violence scenes.  That's more or less a form of sympathetic magic that males engage in to emulate the behavior of someone who has power over them, in order to ritualize not showing fear toward them.  We do that to train our brains to prefer the fight response when confronted with danger, by mentally considering yourself to be on the same authority/predatory level as the attacker, in order to respond to the threat.  Boys that do that are more likely to end up firemen, military members, and in the police than brutally murdering someone, because they've associated the post-traumatic pleasure of a horror movie with the concept of taking action against injustice/violence/evil, and actively develop the "fight" portion of their "fight or flight" response in direct correlation with seeing people being injured around them.
 
2013-04-08 02:37:24 PM

Karate Explosion: I don't know... Maybe violence just isn't scary any more.


Maybe you're more afraid of what they are doing to our legal system than you are afraid of demon beasts from beyond.

I, personally, know that if anything comes back from the dead to punish the living, there's some bigoted assholes down the street who will have much more to fear than I ever will.
 
2013-04-08 02:50:04 PM

Karate Explosion: ** blah blah ** e.


This is a movie about an evil spirit that possessed a girl by raping her with a tree and you're complaining because it doesn't feel real?
 
2013-04-08 03:35:39 PM

AeAe: Karate Explosion: ** blah blah ** e.

This is a movie about an evil spirit that possessed a girl by raping her with a tree and you're complaining because it doesn't feel real?


I'm think his head exploded when watching Jurassic Park
 
2013-04-08 04:22:56 PM

Jake Havechek: The commentary track with just Bruce Campbell on the original Evil Dead DVD is farking hilarious.


I own two copies of Army of Darkness on DVD. The only reason I have the second one is because it was a director's cut and at the time it was the only way to get the Sam Raimi/Bruce Campbell commentary.
 
2013-04-08 04:32:58 PM

farkingismybusiness: Why don't you just kill us?
[media.salon.com image 360x300]
[www.midnightreview.co.uk image 320x240]
You shouldn't forget the importance of entertainment.


That movie sucked.  Hard.  Harder than Ava Devine getting locker-room access during NBA All-Star Week.

I hate torture porn movies with a passion.  Hostel, Saw, all of them.  Evil Dead 2013 did not feel like torture porn.  Yes, it was quite violent, and if it pulled any punches, I couldn't tell.  But it didn't gross me out or make me feel like I need to sit in a cold shower and scrub my skin raw like those movies can.
 
2013-04-08 04:40:20 PM

gunga galunga: Slaves2Darkness: Because you mouth breathing Christian farkers won't let us show tits, ass, pussy and cocks. It sets your Neo-Puritan hearts all a flutter.

As is often said in these threads when this topic comes up....

Hammer a six-inch nail into a woman: Rated R
Hammer a six-inch penis into a woman: Rated NC-17
Hammer a six-inch nail into a board with your penis: Deborah Foreman


Hammer a six-inch nail into your penis: Bob Flanagan, Supermasochist

/and a surprisingly sentimental movie
 
2013-04-08 04:46:13 PM

mongbiohazard: ZeroCorpse: What the hell is he talking about?!?!  The originals were Rated X!!!

I believe they're currently listed as unrated and NC-17 under the new rules. But when they were released theatrically, they got X ratings, and they were AWESOME to see in theaters.


If you RTFA that was precisely the point the author was making. The new one is more sadistic then the original, but the remake was rated an R. They thought it should have been rated NC-17, and were lamenting the fact that we've become inured enough to these movies that in general what once was an NC-17 is now an R.


Well, to be fair, what would have been considered a PG film back when I was growing up, would get a healthy R rating today. Folks are so freaked out by boobs and violence--so long as it isn't good old fashioned "We're going to stomp brown terrorists!" violence that is--that it's hard to get anything that isn't sanitized down to a PG-13.

The ratings are skewed. What folks call NC-17 used to just be R rated films. And folks are loathe to get an NC-17 because of the inability to then market them post theater, to the cable networks. If anything, movies are oddly rated, so that getting an R rating is now considered almost the same as NC-17 used to be, and it's from handwringing like this that has made it so.
 
2013-04-08 04:52:24 PM

hubiestubert: The ratings are skewed. What folks call NC-17 used to just be R rated films. And folks are loathe to get an NC-17 because of the inability to then market them post theater, to the cable networks. If anything, movies are oddly rated, so that getting an R rating is now considered almost the same as NC-17 used to be, and it's from handwringing like this that has made it so.


Slapping a movie with an NC-17 is pretty much censorship sponsored by the MPAA. No major theater will distribute it, most network channels won't advertise for it and while it may get a video release, people see NC-17 movies as pornos.

Over the years the limits for violence has been raised to the point where a movie can have R-rated violence and get a PG-13 but the allowances for language and nudity are non-existent if you want a PG-13. It's strange.
 
2013-04-08 04:54:56 PM
Let me guess, a whiny bleeding heart who cannot separate fake violence in a movie with actual violence in the real world wrote an article and we're all supposed to nod our heads approvingly of his/her convictions.

/reads

Yup.

Movies aren't real farkass.
 
2013-04-08 06:59:00 PM

Clutch2013: farkingismybusiness: Why don't you just kill us?
[media.salon.com image 360x300]
[www.midnightreview.co.uk image 320x240]
You shouldn't forget the importance of entertainment.

That movie sucked.  Hard.  Harder than Ava Devine getting locker-room access during NBA All-Star Week.

I hate torture porn movies with a passion.  Hostel, Saw, all of them.  Evil Dead 2013 did not feel like torture porn.  Yes, it was quite violent, and if it pulled any punches, I couldn't tell.  But it didn't gross me out or make me feel like I need to sit in a cold shower and scrub my skin raw like those movies can.


I actually enjoyed Funny Games, but that just might be because I like all the actors. It was fun in a sort of Clockwork Orange with a bit more ultraviolence way. I remember reading years ago how the director wanted it to be a critique of violence in films, audiences motives to see violent films, and who the audience roots for. Or something like that. Also from what I remember the killers were very strict with rules yet the film didn't obey most movie rules such as don't kill kids, don't break the fourth wall, etc.

/people seem to really hate when the fourth wall was broken. Not me though.
 
2013-04-08 07:37:34 PM
The only reason that you should reach for a copy of the Moonie Times is that you just took a massive, messy dump, and there's  no toilet paper, but there is a copy of that rag lying there.
 
2013-04-08 08:00:33 PM

farkingismybusiness: Clutch2013: farkingismybusiness: Why don't you just kill us?
[media.salon.com image 360x300]
[www.midnightreview.co.uk image 320x240]
You shouldn't forget the importance of entertainment.

That movie sucked.  Hard.  Harder than Ava Devine getting locker-room access during NBA All-Star Week.

I hate torture porn movies with a passion.  Hostel, Saw, all of them.  Evil Dead 2013 did not feel like torture porn.  Yes, it was quite violent, and if it pulled any punches, I couldn't tell.  But it didn't gross me out or make me feel like I need to sit in a cold shower and scrub my skin raw like those movies can.

I actually enjoyed Funny Games, but that just might be because I like all the actors. It was fun in a sort of Clockwork Orange with a bit more ultraviolence way. I remember reading years ago how the director wanted it to be a critique of violence in films, audiences motives to see violent films, and who the audience roots for. Or something like that. Also from what I remember the killers were very strict with rules yet the film didn't obey most movie rules such as don't kill kids, don't break the fourth wall, etc.

/people seem to really hate when the fourth wall was broken. Not me though.


The movie was hanging by a thread for me before the fourth wall mess.  I don't particularly favor movies like that, but I was giving it a chance.  Then that bullshiat with the remote happened.

I don't give a damn what point's trying to be made.  One dude got sloppy, and paid for it - deservedly so.  To introduce a mechanic that was not in the movie at any point beforehand just so you can wiggle your little finger and say "Shame on you, audience"...yeah, that was the point that Haneke made my permanent shiat list.  First and last movie I'll ever watch from him.
 
2013-04-08 08:04:50 PM

devilEther:

Josh was my favorite character in Lost

devilEther: Techhell: /sigh. Troll fed.

I kinda resent being deemed a troll on account the obvious troll was so obvious it was obviously not a troll.


Unless there was a minor role in one-off episodes with a character named "Josh", there was no character of "Josh" in Lost. There was an ACTOR named Josh Holloway in Lost who played the CHARACTER of Sawyer. So you should embrace being called a troll, since that implies you knew exactly what you were doing when you called an ACTOR a CHARACTER in his own TV show, rather than making an embarrassing mistake.
 
2013-04-08 09:27:36 PM

AeAe: There were many decapitations in the movie - self-inflicted and otherwise - and the characters kept chugging along while missing an arm. If that were to happen in RL, that person would immediately pass out from shock and die from blood loss. Not in the movies!


What bothered me about the movie wasn't so much the unrealistic amount of punishment they could take, it was the inconsistency.  For example (SPOILER AHEAD):


That dude with the long hair, he took so much punishment he should died a couple of times, let alone passed out from shock and/or blood loss.  Yet he's still able to actually move around.  Ok, that's unrealistic, but hey they've got people walking around with severed arms so whatever.  But then he gets stabbed in the gut with a 4 inch box cutter, and that kills him?  Seriously?  That wouldn't kill anyone in real life.  Not instantly, anyway.  You might bleed to death in a couple hours if you don't get medical treatment.

I think that bothered me even more than blowing up the cabin by shooting the plastic gas can with a shotgun.
 
2013-04-09 09:19:31 AM

Techhell: devilEther:

Josh was my favorite character in Lost

devilEther: Techhell: /sigh. Troll fed.

I kinda resent being deemed a troll on account the obvious troll was so obvious it was obviously not a troll.

Unless there was a minor role in one-off episodes with a character named "Josh", there was no character of "Josh" in Lost. There was an ACTOR named Josh Holloway in Lost who played the CHARACTER of Sawyer. So you should embrace being called a troll, since that implies you knew exactly what you were doing when you called an ACTOR a CHARACTER in his own TV show, rather than making an embarrassing mistake.


I was replying to the pic above thread that pictured a man who looks like John....ah, nevermind
 
Displayed 50 of 102 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report