#Moral dilemma
48 messages in this thread
>> its a strange society, you can go out and buy a
>> Uzi easily but you can't watch a sensitive nude
>> scene on regular cable.
This is off-topic, but your message created an irresistable impule to expound
(yes, that means hot air). <g>
It has been curious for me that when a movie is made which contains
the most unbelievable gross violence and very realistic gory details,
it does not even get an "R" rating. For example, the Freddy series.
On the other hand, when a movie contains, as mentioned, a sensitive
nude sexual scene, it is automatically given an "X" (ok, it is not X
any more but I forget the correct letters).
It would almost seem as though our society has a deathly fear of
tenderness and a overwhelming love of violence.
Have you been watching NYPD Blue?
P.S. I have seen some shows about commercials in other countries,
and we are not allowed to see some of the uncensored commercials that
come from France and Japan, for example.
Are they more or less mature than we are? <g>
That's an interesting observation,
>> It would almost seem as though our society has a deathly fear of
tenderness and a overwhelming love of violence. << Its a very complex
issue, part of it due to our hertitage and right to have weapons, and
part of it is based on religious perceptions of sex.
personally I'd rather see a lot more sex and nudity on TV, and a lot
less violence. Sort of like the way tv is in Europe.
I'm more into content, heavy doses of either bores me, in other words
I don't care for the Hollywood formula. <g>
On a tangent > It always amazes me how the production quality is so
high and the content so low. They spend a fortune on these movies why
can't they get some decent scripts. (Complain complain complain.) I
think it comes down to depth; no body in Hollywood wants to admit
life is real, so they try to keep up the illusion it isn't. As though
real isn't very interesting.
BTW what are YOU doing up at 2:30 in the A.M?! Or have you joined the
Vampire Club?
John,
I don't care for the Hollywood formula either, especially when it applies to
predictable movies. I like to be kept guessing as to the outcome. However, I
can forgive a poor story if either, there is great CG (e.g. Jurassic Park) or
there is great sex (e.g. Boxing Helena).
There is a genre which I like that Hollywood seems to be hot on at the moment:
erotic thrillers/murder mysteries. My wife and I watched "Whispers in the Dark"
and it certainly spiced up our post-movie activities <nudge, nudge, wink,
wink>. I also liked "Boxing Helena", although nobody else seemed to. You just
needed to not take it too seriously.
His Moviebuffship Martin Foster
Martin,
I like Jurassic Park, the book was better in terms of story, but the visuals
were very good. Sometimes I think they rely to heavily on the visuals to tell
the story, and while I realise its a visual medium the actors can carry the
story along way. I really liked Shadowland for instance. A curiously
interesting film. No gratuitous sex and sensitively portayed, with stunning
visuals. It seemed like a real portrayl of two people dealing with life and
plausible. It had a couple of clicheic moments but then so does life. <g> On
the other side, I'm a Woody Allen fan, regardless of his moral character, his
films are thought provoking and insightful. I find the erotic murder/mystery
genre interesting, but they don't have the same effect on me afterwards. My
biggest problem with films is I've seen so many, I can never remember the names
so its really frustrating discussing them. I just remembered a contrast; Barry
Lyndon and Clockwork Orange, that's the kind of range I like in a director, in
this case Stanley Kubrick, who was always a Hollywood outsider. He should have
won an academy award for Clockwork Orange but the subject matter was way too
intense for its time. He spoofed the liberal intelligentsia, in a way that even
the morally righteous conservative couldn't stomach. Now that's ART. 🙂
-JE
John,
Shadowland sounds interesting – I'll have to look it up in Cinemania. Clockwork
Orange was a brilliant, movie, classic and the film was much easier to follow
than the book which I had read first and which was all written in some
Russian-derived slang (tough reading).
>> Shadowland….No gratuitous sex <<
I firmly believe that sex in movies is never gratuitous, but violence is. Often
it seems like the Hollywood formula requires a sex-scene but they don't put
much effort into it – as if to say "Phew, thank God we've got the mandatory sex
scene over with. Now let's get on with the movie". Instead they could do a lot
better, I think, possibly weaving it into the story. Check out the European
movies, especially French ones. The original, French "the man who loved women"
was a classic and very erotic. I didn't even bother to watch the remake,
starring Burt Reynolds. Also "Alfie" the movie that made Michael Caine a star
is worth a rental.
Well, that's enough for the movie column for now.
Yeah , I've seen Alfie, thought it was pretty humorous. Michael talks to you
about each of the women and how he handles them all through the movie. Its a
little sad too. Shadowland is a new release with Debra Winger and Anthony
Hopkins, a brilliant peformance. Winger was good but Hopkins was superb.
If you get a chance to see Shadowland, let me know if you think a sex scene
would have added anything to the movie. <g> No biased opinions now, as you've
already stated "that sex in the movies is never gratuitous". There is a
suggestion of one in the classic sense where the scene fades out but is
implied. So I guess the question is, would it have been a better movie if the
scene had been fully depicted. The old rule is, if it doesn't move the story,
don't use it, and in that sense, alot of sex scenes are gratuitious. Actually
"Alfie" as I recall didn't have any sex scenes, they were all implied.
Body Heat is a classic erotic/thriller and the way sex was used as an
enticement was expertly handled and intregal to the story. One of my favorite
Kathleen Turner films. 9 1/2 weeks though different in style and content was
also very well done.
"The Story of O" is also a classic on the way kinky side but artfully done. I
think that was Scandinavian.
Anyway check out Shadowland, it was done in your native country at Oxford.
-JE
John,
I liked all the movies you mentioned, except I didn't see "the Story of O"
which I read – pretty ground-breaking at the time of release. Anyhow, I'll
check out "Shadowland", since I'm a sucker for anything with Anthony Hopkins
set in England or Europe <g>.
Martin – FYI its "Shadowlands" I left out the "s". Its a very well done movie
IMHO and that it was done at Oxford gives it special character, but there is a
reason it was done there. Its sort of autobiographical on C.S. Lewis, which I
didn't realise before I went.
-JE
John,
I think I'll go and see "Shadowlands" tonight, and let you know what I think.
>>sort of autobiographical on C.S.Lewis…
Emphasis on the phrase "sort of". From everything I've read and heard
about this, there is far more fiction than bio. FWIW.
If you wanna read some really awesome erotica, check out Story of the Eye, by
Georges Bataille. A real literery masterpiece, IMHO, and some gosh derned good
sex, too <g>!
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John,
>> Story of the Eye, by Georges Bataille. <<
Consider it read! I'll be down at the library Monday morning opening time <g>.
I particularly like translations of late 19th century French literature of the
erotic kind. Wish I knew some titles, but they elude me. I had a copy of a
really good one, but I lent it to friends, who lent it to other friends, and I
lost track of it.
Kubrick is one of my favorites. BTW, have you ever seen his first film, "The
Killing"? Excellent movie, violent subject matter handled very nicely.
Definitely worth checking out. It's really much simpler than his later stuff,
and it's interesting to see how his ideas in this film matured and developed in
his later work.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John –
> Kubrick is one of my favorites. BTW, have you ever seen his first film, "The
> Killing"? Excellent movie, violent subject matter handled very nicely.
That's the one with the classic scene of Ronald Reagan socking Angie Dickinson
on the jaw. That was his last movie, too.
Dave
PMJI – But I've been "infected" by my wife to the point where I find it hard to
enjoy a movie that blends sex with violence, as most do nowadays. I've had a
number of sexual encounters and a few violent ones, but never at the same time.
Most TV/movie sex, though, is a blend – as in the recent Rising Sun. At least
it's not *always* the woman who is on the receiving end of the violence
anymore. I'm not sure it's an improvement, but why must the female viewer
always be identifying with the vulnerable, soon-to-be-terrorized character?
That is saying something to women on a very deep level about what can be
expected of life. I'm afraid I'm one of those who thinks the absurdly high
violence level in the U.S. is related to messages that come on that deep level.
They come from programs, commercials and the 5 o'clock news whispering "Life is
often violent. Expect violence. Expect to be violated." Ees bad, mahn, IMHO.
DT
>> post-movie activities <nudge, nudge, wink, wink>…
Your discussion got me thinking about several movies, some critically
acclaimed, others trashed by the critics… All of them appealled to me for
different reasons (I've noted my reasons parenthetically)
Wild Orchid (Zalman King's use of color and music made this sensuous as well as
sensual). The Cook, the Thief, his Wife and Her Lover (absolutely sick black
comedy, somehow satisfying in its message about gluttony, feels like a stage
play, one scene particularly well editted was a secret tryst in the walk-in
freezer). Sex, Lies and Videotape (man, that was a while ago… I just
remember I liked it.)
I'm very thankful that the best video store in the state is located in my home
town. I get to see all sorts of films from "cultish" to erotic to "artsy" to
just plain commercial. They have the animation Akira that JohnT was raving
about. I'll have to rent it tomorrow when I'm through with Groundhog Day,
Reservoir Dogs and BeetleJuice (why'd they change the spelling anyway?).
On a totally different tangent, but because I said I'd get back to you, and saw
this thread…. <g>
I've been using the EVO on the network, and just to make things tough, I
transferred a rendered animation to a different workstation, than the one that
the EVO is hooked up to with the framebuffer and it has been happily been
putting frames to tape for over an hour now over the network. I'm using the
SVHS connector on a 32+. Its the new driver as well. The old driver works too
but it double pre-rolls. As far as laying down multiple frames, I couldn't
duplicate the problem. Nik says the new driver should be uploaded any day now.
If not, I'll e-mail it to you, if I don't get any complaints for doing so. One
thing I noticed is that on the network you have to use TMODE 11 6 which is what
I've been recommending all along but now it seems to be important for networks
as well.
-JE
David,
I liked all the movies you mentioned. "The cook, the thief, his wife and her
lover" was a great movie and rather sweet. I really like bizarre movies like
that which break the mold.
Blockbuster is the largest rental store near here but they are very puritanical
regarding what they stock. The Wherehouse is close by, but there section is
more mainstream, although less puritanical.
Regarding bizzarre movies… I tried to watch "Prospero's Books" and just could
get past the first 15 minutes.
Did you see Henry and June? – No not Benny and Joon <g>.
David,
>> "Prospero's Books" <<
Don't know it. But what's wrong with it? I'd probably give anything a
try. I often read really bad books all the way through, in the hope
that they'll get better eventually. Often they don't, but hey, I gave
it a chance.
Did you see Henry and June? – No not Benny and Joon <g>
Both actually, Henry and June was pretty good. "The unbearable
lightness of being" was, if I remember correctly, an American movie
done in the Euro-style about a doctor in Prague (I think) who had a
lot of lovers. Not a bad effort, at all. Pretty stylish.
>>"The cook, the thief, his wife and her lover"<<
Absolutely, positively one of my favorite films of all time. Greenaway's a
real nut when he wants to be, and the production design on that film was the
best I've ever seen. Two Dutch fellows (as if you couldn't tell). And Micheal
Nyman's score was just too much. I've got it on CD and listen to it at
breakfast. Nothing like a death march (written in honor of the trampled
Italian soccer fans several years ago, no less) and some soft boiled eggs to
start your day in perspective <g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
It's really dangerous to generalize like that, John. The production process is
very convoluted and bizarre, and the bottom line is money, not content. A film
has to generate SOOO MUUUUUCH money to be viable and worth it, that many
producers spend large amounts of time and brain space figuring out what the
general public (read: unwashed masses <g>) wants, not what'll make the most
interesiting film to smart-assed intellectuals and other fundless bums <g>.
The general public votes with dollars and Nielsen's.
Not only that, but in order to get a good script you've got to have a good
writer. There are NOT that many good writers out there who can write
screenplays (more difficult than novels IMHO), and the ones who are good tend
to cost BIIIIG $$$$ ($500,000 for a re-write or six month option -not a sale-
is not unheard of in the upper eschelons of screenwriterdom. Writing a good
screenplay is hard as sh*t.
Not only that, but many producers who have $$$ to make movies have plain ol'
bad taste (a subjective judgment, no doubt <g>), and couldn't recognize a good
script if it came up and bit their nose off!!
Not only that, but sometimes acts of God during productions can cause the
scenes not to come together as intended in the script (it takes a crew to make
a movie, not one guy with an idea), and the editor has to do the best he can to
salvage it, which sometimes means a total re-write (edit) of the original
story. This is usually a disaster, but better than losing all the money put
into it in the first place.
Bet you weren't expecting a mile long rant on that one, heh <g>?
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Well John, you're entitled to your opinion.
These guys make money either way. And I'm talking about Hollywood not some
small time independent producer. So spare me the "sometimes the weather doesn't
co-operate nonsense". Its like the banking industry, built around holding
companies. They buy insurance so that if the movie doesn't do well they recoup
their costs, and if it hits big all the better. And if it loses big they right
it off, against one's that made alot. My heart bleeds for these guys!
I can't argue that a good screenplay costs money but there are plenty of poor
ones that cost just as much. Like RAMBO!
>> not what'll make the most interesting film to smart-assed intellectuals and
other fundless bums. <<
If you're putting me in that category, I've got news for you. <G> But before I
blast you out of the water on that one, I wanna make sure you were putting me
in that category. 🙂
The kind of films you're talking about are low budget. Any motion picture
that's anything has insurance to insure completion. And they bring in their own
team if you can't do the job. But you're right about one thing, money is the
motivator not content.
-JE
See my e-mail. Didn't want to take up more forum space with my long retort
<g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Since this is going on anyway, I guess I will jump in again.
>> The production process is very convoluted and bizarre,
>> and the bottom line is money, not content. A film has
>> to generate SOOO MUUUUUCH money to be viable and worth it,
>> that many producers spend large amounts of time and brain…
You make good points but another part of the convolution is the fear factor.
I have heard about movies that contained various levels of (shudder <g>) SEX,
and it was fairly important in the development of the story line. But the
rating people, who only see the thing when it has been finished, then say that
it is "adults only" unless there are major cuts. These cuts destroy the story
line but the censors don't give a rats ass about that.
At that point the choices are: a) accept an "adults only" rating which means
that it will have a very limited audience since the megaplex theatres will not
even book this movie, or b) destroy the movie by re-editing it.
On the other hand, a movie can have the most outragously vicious graphic
violence and it will get a PG, without any comments at all. Obvious tilt, make
a mindlessly violent movie and a) it will play in every mall, b) make a TON of
money, and c) MOST IMPORTANTLY, will encounter NO PROBLEMS with the
authoritarian censors.
You're right. Even though it sounded like I was disagreeing with Martin's and
John E's and others' opinions about shitty movies, I really don't I have the
feeling we like many of the same flicks.
I just wanted to throw in another perspective, and I tend to get a little riled
when people start viewing "hollywood" as this machine sort of thing, when it's
really this mostly unorganized gaggle of producers, etc…, who are up against
really bizarre odds to be successful in making movies, good or bad. I really
don't want to get into creative content, other than offer my opinion, because I
believe strongly in the right to show whatever, and the right to like whatever,
and the right to veiw whatever.
I think there is a justifiable, and good moveing force in many people,
including audience and filmmakers, to change this "easy kill" method of movie
makers. I think violence is slowly losing popularity (it will always be part
of drama, but to what extent?) in step with it's growing power in everyone's
lives.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Amen to that. Sex is more enjoyable than violence on th e screen as in real
life <g>. Just shows you where the priorities with the majority of people in
this #@&^ing country are.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
>> Just shows you where the priorities with the majority of people in
>> this #@&^ing country are.
I resent that. I hate to start this but I could not let this go by. I won't
argue your reasons. Just the tone. I just can't understand someone to make such
a statement about this country. If anything, the right to freely leave is
guaranteed by the constitution.
Point taken, Gus – I do love and respect this country, for better or worse. I
was angry when I wrote that message, and misplaced the feeling on a very large
target (3000 miles across, tough to miss <g>).
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
>> Sex is more enjoyable than violence on th e screen as in real life <g>. <<
Double amen! The English movie censors tend to have the attitude that tons of
sex is fine, but they really frown on gratuitous violence. For example, I think
Rambo II was banned (for a while, or heavily censored to be accepted), although
heavily sexual material and full-frontal nudity is commonplace. This is what I
remember of things up to 1985, although I doubt it's changed. (English lurkers:
feel free to correct me <g>)
It was like that in Germany when I was growing up, too. I remember seeing full
frontal nudity (not sex, though) at six in the evening as a commonplace thing.
On the other hand, it's easy to forget that drama is always violent in some
way, wether it's emotional, physical, or aesthetic. Greek tradgedies, the
origins of drama and arguably some of the coolest stories ever, are pretty
darned violent – like Medea, Oedepus Rex, etc…. For me it's the presentation
and how important it is to the story. I like a movie with violence (in
whatever form) as puncuation, not substance.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
John,
in Germany, you'll see full-frontal nudity down at the park quite frequently.
At least back in the early 80's when I was doing a lot of travelling and
visiting friends there. We'd go to the parks by a lake and you'd see hundreds
of mainly young people running around totally naked. I took my clothes off
straight away, because I didn't want to attract any attention and you'd get
more attention wearing clothes than not. I'd have to say these kids were acting
as natural as can be, and I soon shared their mentality despite the fact this
kind of behaviour would be frowned on in the UK. The summer of '83 a group of
us (myself, a german friend, and a german guy and his german girlfriend)
embarked on a huge roadtrip around the Eastern Mediterranean. In Greece,
everytime we arrived at a beach the german girl, who was an absolute beauty of
statuesque proportions and form, would immediately take all her clothes off and
enjoy the sun, sand and sea. She caused quite a furor among the local Greek men
and boys because we were not in the main tourist areas and nudity was illegal
there. She'd always draw a hovering crowd of curious onlookers, to whom she was
totally oblivious. Quite the Aphrodite! Anyway, nobody ever called the police
so they probably weren't excessively offended.
Then I came to the USA and my freewheeling attitude towards nudity had to be
suppressed because the majority of men now wear baggy shorts to cover their
"naughty bits" <g>.
Martin
>> the majority of men now wear baggy shorts to cover their "naughty bits" <
Whereas in Europe, if they wear a bathing suit at all its the "speedo" type
that exaggerate the "naughty bits" and except for swimmers seems to embarass
most American males. Pretty fun in a country where men are typically so
"Macho".
-JE
>> if they wear a bathing suit at all its the "speedo" type …. and
except for swimmers seems to embarass most American males <<
that is so true!! I brought some "speedos" to the USA, wore them once
at the New England summer camp where I was working in '85 and
everybody made fun of me! I was so humilated that I never wore them
again <g>. Baggy shorts thereafter. I guess if I went back to Europe,
I could get back into their customs very quickly – they'd probably
laugh at my baggies <g>.
Martin,
>> I could get back into their customs very quickly – they'd probably laugh at
my baggies. <<
Or think you were trying to hide something. <G>
-JE
Ed,
>> Or think you were trying to hide something. <G> <<
Exactly.
Martin "no concealed weapons on me" Foster
>>Naughty bits<< <gggg>!
Germans can be such fun sometimes!
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
>>> Naughty bits <<<
>> Germans can be such fun sometimes! <<
Martin is English, ol' mate!
-JE
I know he's English. I was just referring to the Germans' fondness
for bearing their "naughty bits" <g>. I remember a news report,
where one particularly beautiful anchor woman walked through the
streets of Munich asking the folks if they found her toplessness
(yep, no shirt, no bra <g>) offensive or pleasant. If I remember
correctly, most people didn't mind at all, and it was her buisness if
she wanted to go about topless. Another memorable part of it was the
German's composure and non-chalance at being approached by a topless
woman and a camera man. I think she would have gotten arrested for
doing that here.
good story! We should get together I've got so many travel stories I
could probably fill a book! I'd love to hear more about your time in
Germany. How long did you live there? Etc.
Here's another anecdote about one of my first German "park"
experiences. In the summer of '82, following a 1 month working
holiday on a farm in Switzerland, I decided to visit my old friend
Klaus in Karlsruhe, Germany. We went to one of the lakeside parks by
the Rhein where all the local kids went in the summer. Only
difference, everybody was naked. What a sight! Hundreds of people of
all ages, although most were teens, doing what you'd see in most such
places: playing games, swimming, sailboarding, picnicing,
sunbathing. This was no big orgy, like less enlightened might
imagine. I'd known Klaus for at least 6 years because we'd done a few
school exchanges where we'd stayed at each others houses for 2 weeks
at a time, alternately in England and in Germany. Plus, we'd shared a
few vacations into our college years. Anyway, he had a younger sister
who I hadn't seen since she was 13. She was now 16 (I was 19) and had
grown into quite a beautiful young woman. When I arrived at the park
she was running around with her friends, the picture of innocence, as
nature intended (naked). We strolled over to say hello but Klaus and
I still had all my clothes on. She became extremely embarrassed,
mumbled a greeting and quickly hurried off. Later, when I had shed
my clothes she came over to say goodbye and now she had all her
clothes on and I didn't. I think she was still embarrassed, although
I was quite comfortable by now. Unfortunately, we never had a chance
to talk about it.
I suppose the psychological point was that she could be totally
innocent in her nakedness with friends and with strangers, but not
with an old friend of the family who had not known her in that
"state". This is probably quite normal, but I'm no psych major. I
hope you enjoyed my story.
>> I think she would have gotten arrested for doing that here.
If I'm not mistaken, a NY court ruled it discriminatory to allow men
to go topless and not women. So I believe that provided it is not
for solicitation purposes, anyone may wander the city topless.
Not only more enjoyable, but more real. Damn near everybody has sex pretty
often, but most people rarely or never engage in violence. Our cultural bias
that says violence is OK to see, but sex isn't is absolutely ludicrous. The
U.S. culture is heavily _control_ fixated. Control and suppression with the
accompanying chaos and rebellion. Two extreme poles, rather than a balanced
stance. Our current situation reflects this heavy tension.
>>Two extreme poles, rather than a balanced stance<<
A good summary of an american cultural bias. It is disturbing, but at the same
time makes for an exciting, dynamic environment. I've always believed that
strife and turmoil brings out the best in individuals (personal experience, I'm
afraid), and states of equilibrium rarely last. I feel rather optimistic about
America's cultural dynamics – I notice change and forward movement. This
change is best seen in the proliferation of "special interest groups'"
(women's, racial, sexual orientation, religous, parental, etc…) empowerment.
And while I find these special interest groups sometimes highly annoying in
their often gross, childlike "super-anger" and desire to
"do-to-them-what-they've-done-to-us", I see their current momentum as a sign of
an "adolescent" phase of cultural development. Perhaps we'll see the "early
adult, early 20's" stage before we all drop dead <g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
Interesting slant on things. I tend to think of cultures as organisms
and view the growth of our species as directly mappable to the growth
of an individual. I think the species mentality, reflected in the
behaviors we've been talking about, is reaching that point where
self-reflection leads to a breakdown of the personality. In an
individual this process can lead to a rebirth and renewal as a new
being -or- it can lead to an ongoing futile attempt to shore up the
walls of the old personality, like a caterpillar taping its cocoon
together, resisting becoming a butterfly. This crisis of evolution
can lead to a paralysis of indecision and struggle, even death -or-
it can lead to vistas of growth. There's no guarantee, as far as I
can see, that our species will certainly be able to survive the
transition. I hope so, though…
ditto <g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)
ditto <g>.
John Tissavary (La Luna cie)