Darth Solo's movie i seen last night opinion, be it an old or new filum. — Page 5

C3PX said:

Warbler said:

C3PX said:

Casablanca is overrated. And underrated. At the same time. 

I'm not sure I understand you.   Could you please elaborate?  

 

I'd love to elaborate on it. Don't get me wrong, I really, really like Casablanca, if I had to write down a list of only ten movies that I'd be allowed to watch for the rest of my life, Casablanca would be on that list.

That said, I think the movie is overrated to a good degree. I think it just gets far more credit than any film deserves. It is elevated to the level that for someone to say they don't like it is almost blasphemous. To an extent, I think we are even at the point where proclaiming it one of the, if not the greatest film of all time is a prerequisite to being considered a true film geek. Sometime I wonder if half the people who "love it" don't do so simply because they feel they should, rather than because of their own honest objective viewing of the film. (Don't think I doubt that you genuinely like the movie, Warb. I've no doubt that you do).

On the opposite side of this, there are way too many people out there who have not seen this really great movie for no fair reason other than "Isn't that film like, really, really old?" which isn't a good enough reason in my book.

So, I think it is way overrated among certain circles; and unfortunately underrated (or, more accurately: unknown) to an unfortunate portion of the population.

blasphemer!!  just kidding.      I wouldn't serious call it blasphemous to like Casablanca, would just disagree with person much in the same way that I disagreed  with Vaderisnothayden on the Godfather films.   The only reason I would accuse someone of blasphemy for not liking Casablanca would if they said they didn't like it because it was in b&w.  That is no reason for not liking a movie.   Those kinds of people should be drawn, hung and quartered(along with those that want to colorize b&w movies).  As for why I like Casablanca,  I just think all the parts of the it(set, music, story, directing,  actors and their characters, timing of the release) just all blend together  in it unlike another other movie before or since.    I'll be honest, when I first saw it as a kid, I didn't think to much of it.   But then as I got older I watched again and the older I got, the more I enjoyed it until it got to the point where I thought it was the best movie ever made.

Vaderisnothayden said:

Warbler said:

Vaderisnothayden, I couldn't disagree with you more about the Godfathers film.  But, you're entitled to your opinion.   I guess we just have different tastes when it comes to movies and that's ok.   

As for Gibsom.   Yes his statements are unacceptable, but why let that deprive you from enjoying his movies?   I can perhaps understand not wanting to buy a ticket to his movie and give him money.  But you can still the enjoy his movies when they come on TV.   Even if want to take it as far as not watching his movies and boycotting everything Gibson,  I still don't understand letting his statements affect you opinions how good or bad the movie is.  For instance,  I boycott the Eagles because of Michael Vick.   But  I don't let that affect how I evaluate Vick as a QB nor do I let it affect how I evaluate the quality of the Eagles' team as a whole.    see what I mean?

As for Braveheart,  if we were only supposed to get a kick out of the death  because the guy was gay,  explain I how got a kick out of it without knowing he was gay?

Because he's portrayed as an eejit. But his being portrayed as an eejit is part of the anti-gay thing. You're supposed to get a kick out of seeing a gay guy go out the window. I'm sorry but that's obvious. Just because you didn't know and got a kick anyway doesn't change it.

 

ok, if you say so. 

Vaderisnothayden

As for Gibsom.   Yes his statements are unacceptable, but why let that deprive you from enjoying his movies? 

Well I don't know how anybody could enjoy his movies knowing about his views.

well for one thing, I liked some of his movies before he made the remarks.  Should I just lie and say I hate them now?   I liked Braveheart and thought it was a great movie before his remarks,  should I now say it stinks?   His remarks don't change the quality(or lack there of) of his movies themselves.

Vaderisnothayden

I still don't understand letting his statements affect you opinions how good or bad the movie is. 

Well, as far as I'm concerned having Gibson in a movie is like having a big crap front and center the whole movie. I don't want to watch that and I don't think it's much good.

I'm guessing you thought before the statements.    So your dislike comes from the movies themselves and not the offending statements he made

Warbler said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

Warbler said:

Vaderisnothayden, I couldn't disagree with you more about the Godfathers film.  But, you're entitled to your opinion.   I guess we just have different tastes when it comes to movies and that's ok.   

As for Gibsom.   Yes his statements are unacceptable, but why let that deprive you from enjoying his movies?   I can perhaps understand not wanting to buy a ticket to his movie and give him money.  But you can still the enjoy his movies when they come on TV.   Even if want to take it as far as not watching his movies and boycotting everything Gibson,  I still don't understand letting his statements affect you opinions how good or bad the movie is.  For instance,  I boycott the Eagles because of Michael Vick.   But  I don't let that affect how I evaluate Vick as a QB nor do I let it affect how I evaluate the quality of the Eagles' team as a whole.    see what I mean?

As for Braveheart,  if we were only supposed to get a kick out of the death  because the guy was gay,  explain I how got a kick out of it without knowing he was gay?

Because he's portrayed as an eejit. But his being portrayed as an eejit is part of the anti-gay thing. You're supposed to get a kick out of seeing a gay guy go out the window. I'm sorry but that's obvious. Just because you didn't know and got a kick anyway doesn't change it.

 

ok, if you say so. 

Vaderisnothayden

As for Gibsom.   Yes his statements are unacceptable, but why let that deprive you from enjoying his movies? 

Well I don't know how anybody could enjoy his movies knowing about his views.

well for one thing, I liked some of his movies before he made the remarks.  Should I just lie and say I hate them now?   I liked Braveheart and thought it was a great movie before his remarks,  should I now say it stinks?   His remarks don't change the quality(or lack there of) of his movies themselves.

Vaderisnothayden

I still don't understand letting his statements affect you opinions how good or bad the movie is. 

Well, as far as I'm concerned having Gibson in a movie is like having a big crap front and center the whole movie. I don't want to watch that and I don't think it's much good.

I'm guessing you thought before the statements.    So your dislike comes from the movies themselves and not the offending statements he made

My dislike comes from what I know about the man. Knowing that about him, I dislike his presence onscreen and thus I dislike any movie with him in it.

well for one thing, I liked some of his movies before he made the remarks.  Should I just lie and say I hate them now?   I liked Braveheart and thought it was a great movie before his remarks,  should I now say it stinks?   His remarks don't change the quality(or lack there of) of his movies themselves.

Well, for me, learning about the man (like reading his statement about Jews and adding that to other info and stuff about him) made me feel differently about all his movies, because now I couldn't stand the guy and thus couldn't stand any movie with him in it. 

Braveheart happened in an earlier decade when people were used to giving homophobia more of a free pass, so I downplayed the homophobia in Braveheart and other negative stuff in it, even though I heard people complain about it. But after his statement about Jews I took a new look at everything about him. Things I'd let pass before (when I shouldn't have) I now paid attention to. Apart from the homophobia in Braveheart, there was the portrayal of the English in Braveheart, for example. It's my impression that Braveheart is seething with serious Anglophobia. Then there's the sadistic elements in Braveheart and The Passion (I'm not the only person who's noted those). And there's the heavy repetition of the theme of revenge in films Gibson stars in or directs. I'm not against revenge in movies, but I think this gets to be a bit much.

I'd already noted his father's comments about Jews (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hutton_Gibson ) and the fact that Mel Gibson said his father never lied to him (I asked myself what did his father say to him about Jews and did Gibson consider it a lie?), but before I'd hoped Mel didn't agree with his father's views. Before Mel's comments about Jews, I had grown more suspicious when he made The Passion, because I'm aware that the myth that the Jews killed Jesus has been motivation for genocide in the past. After his comments about Jews I felt my suspicions had been confirmed.

I also picked up various anecdotes about him over the years and, adding all this stuff (including all the above listed stuff) together, I ended up with a picture that revolted me. I don't want to see this guy on the screen and I would not enjoy watching this guy onscren or watching any film with him in it. It's a pity, because Braveheart has many positive elements (like many good performances from other actors). But I don't want to be watching a guy like that or trying to identify with him like you often have to with the main character in a film. And ultimately I think boycotting him is the morally right thing to do. I'm actually pretty pissed off that he still has a career. 

Here's an article about Gibson's views from around the time of The Passion, about 2.5 years before his 2006 comments about Jews:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2004/02/16/does_gibson_deserve_the_passion_backlash/

 It shows the sort of suspicions I had around that time.

I aint got no idea whats happening to my tread, but rest assured haydenisnotvader, i can shake my head in this mask. Even if i can only just think it.

vote_for_palpatine said:

That's twisting the situation. I'm hardly saying gays should only be portrayed in a positive light. In this situation their gayness was a subject of mockery and it was clearly portrayed as being a negative trait.

"That's twisting the situation" implies some sort of intent to perform a takedown on you, and that's not what I was trying to do. I simply thought your first statement seemed extreme, but then you clarified it with the above statement, which was 100% reasonable.

But then you said this:

But his being portrayed as an eejit is part of the anti-gay thing.

This reads as though you mean to say that it is an anti-gay thing to portray gays as idiots. This is not necessarily true. A great number of eejits happen to be gay. I hate to say that and risk being labled as some sort of bigot, but idiocy runs rampant throughout humanity, regardless of gender, race, socio-economic status - or sexual preference.

Maybe it was irrelevant to the larger point of the movie, but I think it goes to show what a despotic bully Longshanks was.

I did agree that the movie was stacked against the British, as though the Scots were pure as the driven snow and the EEEEEEEVILLL British existed only to commit atrocities. History is rarely so one-sided.

You can portray a gay person as an eejit (not idiot, not precisely the same thing, includes a side of jerk in there too) and have it come off like they're an eejit who just happens to be gay. But you can also portray a gay person as an eejit in such a way as to imply that they're an eejit because they're gay, and that's what I think Braveheart does there.

And I think you're really supposed to be cheering on Longshanks when he kills the guy.

I dont think i wanna be accepted here no mores.....

My comedy is off the wall, but off tropic, well here thats just somethin else!

I didnt get going into off tropic takes your tread off tropic aswell, whilst almost staying on tropic. Erm, im confuzin myself now....

Ben says "these aren't the droids you're looking for." But if you look closely, you'll see that they ARE the droids they're looking for! I can't believe no-one spotted this...(DE)

Maybe they weren't really looking for droids. Maybe they were just asking the question because that's what they figured good stormtroopers would do in that situation. When really they just wanted to hang out in Mos Eisley and watch the scum and villainy.

That line comes back to me all the time whenever somebody says something that sounds a bit like it. The same with some other classic Star Wars lines. "Move along now" "Sorry about the mess".

Read the next line of my sig...then just think about it ;-)

Vaderisnothayden said:

vote_for_palpatine said:

That's twisting the situation. I'm hardly saying gays should only be portrayed in a positive light. In this situation their gayness was a subject of mockery and it was clearly portrayed as being a negative trait.

"That's twisting the situation" implies some sort of intent to perform a takedown on you, and that's not what I was trying to do. I simply thought your first statement seemed extreme, but then you clarified it with the above statement, which was 100% reasonable.

But then you said this:

But his being portrayed as an eejit is part of the anti-gay thing.

This reads as though you mean to say that it is an anti-gay thing to portray gays as idiots. This is not necessarily true. A great number of eejits happen to be gay. I hate to say that and risk being labled as some sort of bigot, but idiocy runs rampant throughout humanity, regardless of gender, race, socio-economic status - or sexual preference.

Maybe it was irrelevant to the larger point of the movie, but I think it goes to show what a despotic bully Longshanks was.

I did agree that the movie was stacked against the British, as though the Scots were pure as the driven snow and the EEEEEEEVILLL British existed only to commit atrocities. History is rarely so one-sided.

You can portray a gay person as an eejit (not idiot, not precisely the same thing, includes a side of jerk in there too) and have it come off like they're an eejit who just happens to be gay. But you can also portray a gay person as an eejit in such a way as to imply that they're an eejit because they're gay, and that's what I think Braveheart does there.

And I think you're really supposed to be cheering on Longshanks when he kills the guy.

 

 

the movie may or may not be anti-gay,  but it is pretty clear you are never supposed to cheer for Longshanks.    He's the bad guy of the film.     Maybe the film was anti-English, but the Brits have done some pretty bad things at times.  Its a movie about Scotland fighting for independence from England.   You can't it expect it to be pro-English. I am not offended and I am of English decent.

I think I can kind of see where you are coming from with his offensive remarks.   Whenever you see him on screen,  all you can think about are those statements and ruins the enjoyment of the film for you.    Maybe I am wrong for enjoying his films, I don't know.  All I can say is that I like some of his films and I condemn his statements.    I read the wiki page about Gibson's father.   He seems like a real nut job.  

Warbler said:

Vaderisnothayden said:

vote_for_palpatine said:

That's twisting the situation. I'm hardly saying gays should only be portrayed in a positive light. In this situation their gayness was a subject of mockery and it was clearly portrayed as being a negative trait.

"That's twisting the situation" implies some sort of intent to perform a takedown on you, and that's not what I was trying to do. I simply thought your first statement seemed extreme, but then you clarified it with the above statement, which was 100% reasonable.

But then you said this:

But his being portrayed as an eejit is part of the anti-gay thing.

This reads as though you mean to say that it is an anti-gay thing to portray gays as idiots. This is not necessarily true. A great number of eejits happen to be gay. I hate to say that and risk being labled as some sort of bigot, but idiocy runs rampant throughout humanity, regardless of gender, race, socio-economic status - or sexual preference.

Maybe it was irrelevant to the larger point of the movie, but I think it goes to show what a despotic bully Longshanks was.

I did agree that the movie was stacked against the British, as though the Scots were pure as the driven snow and the EEEEEEEVILLL British existed only to commit atrocities. History is rarely so one-sided.

You can portray a gay person as an eejit (not idiot, not precisely the same thing, includes a side of jerk in there too) and have it come off like they're an eejit who just happens to be gay. But you can also portray a gay person as an eejit in such a way as to imply that they're an eejit because they're gay, and that's what I think Braveheart does there.

And I think you're really supposed to be cheering on Longshanks when he kills the guy.

 

 

the movie may or may not be anti-gay,  but it is pretty clear you are never supposed to cheer for Longshanks.    He's the bad guy of the film.     Maybe the film was anti-English, but the Brits have done some pretty bad things at times.  Its a movie about Scotland fighting for independence from England.   You can't it expect it to be pro-English. I am not offended and I am of English decent.

Longshanks being the villain doesn't mean you're never supposed to cheer for him, no matter how much he's the bad guy. I think it's very clear from that scene that you're supposed to enjoy him killing that gay guy.

And I know very well what shitty things England did, to Ireland, Wales and Scotland. But the film strikes me as encouraging real anger against English people, anger which could be dangerous for ordinary English people. Attacks on people for being English are not unheard of.

maybe you are supposed to enjoy him killing the guy,  but are you supposed to enjoy it because he's gay?  I don't see it.

You really think Scottish people are gong to attack English people because of Braveheart?  I don't think so.    You agree they did shitty things, what is so wrong about a movie depicting them doing those things?    Would you say it was wrong to do a movie about the holocaust for fear of people attacking ordinary Germans?  

Warbler said:

maybe you are supposed to enjoy him killing the guy,  but are you supposed to enjoy it because he's gay?  I don't see it.

You really think Scottish people are gong to attack English people because of Braveheart?  I don't think so.    You agree they did shitty things, what is so wrong about a movie depicting them doing those things?    Would you say it was wrong to do a movie about the holocaust for fear of people attacking ordinary Germans?  

Nope. Nor would I have problem a movie that depicts English people doing bad things to another people, like Michael Collins or The Wind That Shakes The Barley. But Braveheart doesn't just depict English people doing evil. The specific way the English are portrayed and treated by the film seems to me to particularly encourage hostility towards English people. I know people who've come out of that movie wanting to beat the shit out of some English people.

You really think Scottish people are gong to attack English people because of Braveheart? 

I think it's possible. I'm probably a lot more familiar with Celtic Anglophobia than you are, being a citizen of a celtic nation.

Warbler said:

maybe you are supposed to enjoy him killing the guy,  but are you supposed to enjoy it because he's gay?  I don't see it.

 Well maybe you don't, but other people do.

C3PX said:

Darth Solo said:

I dont think i wanna be accepted here no mores.....

What kind of talk is that? Yeah you do!

Threads at OT.com's off topic section don't go off topic, they come ALIVE! Darth Solo my friend, your thread is now a living, breathing entity, thriving of its own accord. You should be proud of it, like a new father of sorts. I am a regular here, and even I have an extremely hard time making threads that reach this level liveliness.

Be proud of your thread!

Meanwhile, we'll try to steer it back to the original topic... I hope. Personally, I consider it a miracle we are still even discussing filums.

Oh, okay then. That could work if i think of it that way, i guess.

This tread is now open for busness again people! Rejoyce!

And im back to seeking acceptance here in the underworld again..Rejoyce!

And CPX said filums..Retarded!

Now what are we talking about you fine people? Oh, urm, yeah, gays....I no longer want to be accepted again....

Who was the donut stabber in Lost as i lost my way with lost after series 3? Or did i dismiss that one from my memory aswell?

No need to turn all gimpy on my nieve arse though.

He was a bum fiddler? Sheesh, they come in all shapes and sizes. They should have a tatoo on their head or something.