logo Sign In

RicOlie_2

User Group
Members
Join date
6-Jun-2013
Last activity
19-Aug-2025
Posts
5,623

Post History

Post
#755080
Topic
thread to continue the sex/gore in movies/tv dicussion from the Random Thoughts thread
Time

One point I would like to make is that nudity/partial nudity is not always inappropriate in a movie. There is no problem with showing breasts on screen provided it isn't done to titillate. For instance, in The Gods Must Be Crazy, we see quite a few mostly naked people, but the movie isn't inappropriate (although if I recall correctly, there was one scene not involving the Bushmen that was questionable) because those people were not nearly naked for the purpose of entertainment. It was simply the way those people dressed.

Post
#754649
Topic
thread to continue the sex/gore in movies/tv dicussion from the Random Thoughts thread
Time

Ryan McAvoy said:

RicOlie_2 said:

In Saving Private Ryan (which I need to finish watching some time--I started it at a friend's house and never finished), the gore is not shown just for shock value. It shows the horror of war rather than glorifying violence and making it look fun and exciting like most war shows do.

Don't bother with finishing watching it then, as elements of the second half very moch glorify war, which was a bit wierd IMO. If you've seen the shocking beach assault then you've seen the best that film has to offer.

 Alright, I'll bump it down my list.

Post
#754457
Topic
thread to continue the sex/gore in movies/tv dicussion from the Random Thoughts thread
Time

That's a good point, though I was thinking more of a psychopathic killer at the time rather than a war zone. I'm opposed to pointless gore, just for the sake of shocking. I guess that means my response doesn't really answer Duracell's question adequately.

One of the things that I disagree with most as regards onscreen sex and gore is that it is not treating the human person with respect, but objectifying them or making them an object of entertainment/shock value.

In Saving Private Ryan (which I need to finish watching some time--I started it at a friend's house and never finished), the gore is not shown just for shock value. It shows the horror of war rather than glorifying violence and making it look fun and exciting like most war shows do. I don't think that former portrayal is a bad thing. Thus, it isn't being disrespectful to the human person as a really gory horror show might.

Post
#754450
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

Bataille Navale a.k.a. Battleship (2012)

Incredibly unrealistic, had some handy deus ex machina's in there like the Air Force coming in at just the right second but not being their beforehand with no explanation (granted, however, that I was not watching the movie in my native language and might have missed something). The black guy didn't die, however, and he even got a medal at the end. Storywise, I don't think it was great, but it was fun to watch. I don't plan on ever seeing it again, however.

No rating as usual. I never know how to rate movies, and first impressions are unreliable.

Post
#754429
Topic
Random Thoughts
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

This may be harkening back to the dead and retired conversation on the whole 50 Shades of Grey discussion, but I've got a serious question for darth_ender and others who share similar views on sexuality in films.

Is it alright to portray graphic sex in a film if it's portrayed in a bad light -- ie. as immoral and/or damaging to the people who partake it in? Not to glorify promiscuity/adultery/etc., but to show its ugly side?

 No, because it would be pointless. I wouldn't want to see a movie that had really explicit gory scenes either. I don't need to see every detail in order to understand an idea, which could be conveyed through dialogue, or hinting at sex/gore. I don't think it's always wrong for two people to be shown on screen in the act, so long as it isn't sexually arousing. Once it's sexually arousing, it becomes porn, and I believe that porn is very wrong.

Post
#754161
Topic
Star Wars: Episode VII to be directed by J.J. Abrams **NON SPOILER THREAD**
Time

Hal 9000 said:

About ready to call it quits for the night, but I have tomorrow off work. Wondering if its too early to start inviting people over for a staggered Star Wars viewing as leadup to Ep7. Starting in June, one film a month. Also in need of Star Wars themed drinks. Not necessarily all alcoholic. 

 Blue milk shouldn't be too hard, as long as you have food-colouring. ;)

Post
#754156
Topic
Last movie seen
Time

EyeShotFirst said:

TV's Frink said:

EyeShotFirst said:


watch it by yourself the first time you see it.

 Why?

 I think it plays better by yourself. If you watch it with some mature people who won't crack a joke every five seconds, I guess it's okay.

 Well, I guess if I ever watch it, my father won't be allowed to be in the audience....

Post
#754068
Topic
[fill in the blank] Just Died!
Time

Thanks, but as I haven't seen her much in the last several years, I felt little more than a twinge of regret, I'm afraid. She nearly died twice in my memory, and I was less affected by it each time, partly due to seeing her less and less often, no doubt.

I knew three of my great-grandparents, one of which had quite a few interesting stories to tell...many, many times over with no variation....

Post
#754056
Topic
If you need to B*tch about something... this is the place
Time

DrCrowTStarwars said:

AVG if you have to release a bloated 90MB update file each and every week that I can't stop your program from downloading could you at least offer a service where I can buy the update on CDRom so it doesn't tie up my internet connection for weeks at a time, not even letting me into GMail?!!!

 If only you had had no internet connection yesterday and today....