Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Double standards, anyone? (76)

This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.

29 Jun 09, 3:17 PM
Max_Bedroom
4 yrs

Lady_Lucan wrote:
All in all a shame for the makers of Severance because it's a fairly amusing film, if half an hour too long. The last line is a classic.

Indeed, I thoroughly bloody enjoyed it (although I do have a soft spot for Danny Dyer), and afterwards, I merely maimed several people, all of whom recovered afterwards.

29 Jun 09, 3:20 PM
mr_Hate
4 yrs

MissFelicity wrote:

mr_Hate wrote:

MissFelicity wrote:
And yes I do like other films. Usually things like Terminator with lots of violence and a crap plot.

Terminator doesn't have that bad a plot - there's some interesting ideas in there (combined with some hinting at the time paradox argument). Sure it's not hugely complex, but it's more interesting than a lot of other movies. Compare it to Transformers for instance. But not for long, as TF could drive you mad.

You kidding? I loved transformers, think it was great! Just shows that different people find different things entertaining!

Exactly! Though TF was pretty dire compared to the cartoon movie. Orson Welles FTW.

Spirifer - yeah, my posts were mostly aimed at the people saying Horror films are damaging and/or should be banned

29 Jun 09, 3:20 PM
Lady_Lucan
UK(L), 4 yrs

Max_Bedroom wrote:
(although I do have a soft spot for Danny Dyer)

Same here - can't figure out why. Oh the shame! Thoroughly enjoying 'Deadliest Men 2' atm - absolutely cringemaking viewing.

They that love not Tobacco & Boies were fooles.

29 Jun 09, 3:24 PM
El_Presidente
UK(G), 4 yrs

MissFelicity wrote:
I do not believe that pictures of one human being harming another should be published for entertainment.

Even consensually?

I guess that's the end of boxing and Rugby then.

"If you've got a date in Constantinople, she'll be waiting in Istanbul."

29 Jun 09, 3:25 PM
ConsciousnessJunkie
UK(N), 5 yrs

El_Presidente wrote:

Even consensually?

I guess that's the end of boxing and Rugby then.

See that's the problem. There will never be a consensus on what is ok.

Rugby is a bit different to nailing through someone's scrotum etc though.

www.felicityfatale.co.uk ~ Fun Photography

29 Jun 09, 3:27 PM
El_Presidente
UK(G), 4 yrs

MissFelicity wrote:
See that's the problem. There will never be a consensus on what is ok.

Rugby is a bit different to nailing through someone's scrotum etc though.

Yes, it's different, but what exactly is it that makes one acceptable and the other unacceptable in your eyes?

"If you've got a date in Constantinople, she'll be waiting in Istanbul."

29 Jun 09, 3:31 PM
ConsciousnessJunkie
UK(N), 5 yrs

El_Presidente wrote:

Yes, it's different, but what exactly is it that makes one acceptable and the other unacceptable in your eyes?

With rugby, the intent of the sport is not to injure or physically damage the other person. The intent is to score points.

The physical injuries in rugby (or my sport, water polo) are accidents. Or the occasional result of a temper flare.

With much extreme porn, the objective is the damage the other person. I personally don't see anything right in damaging another person deliberately.

www.felicityfatale.co.uk ~ Fun Photography

Edited 29 Jun 09, 3:32 PM by ConsciousnessJunkie

29 Jun 09, 3:34 PM
Grownup_Frankie
UK, 3 yrs

Films about death may be a product of our uneasy relationship with the idea of dying. I mean, its not JUST an idea is it? Its a fact.

We are all going to die. It depends I suppose whether you consider films, books, plays, etc as merely entertainment, or as art - art serves to inform society of where it is at at any particular point in time, and to explore what preoccupies society.

Society remains fearful, and that fear - that shadow - is best dragged into the light, even if only figurately (I suspect would be the arguement 'for' - or at least the explanation for).

29 Jun 09, 3:35 PM
spirifer
UK, 6 yrs

Lady_Lucan wrote:

spirifer wrote:
In this case, a *direct link* between a horror film and a murder has been shown.

Nope, not a direct link, but a link claimed by the perpetrator. About as convincing in causality terms as 'God told me to kill all those filthy prostitutes'.

All in all a shame for the makers of Severance because it's a fairly amusing film, if half an hour too long. The last line is a classic.

Is there a scene with someone having something poured down their throat and then set alight in Severance?

The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation - Pierre Trudeau
A denizen of a right little, tight little island.

29 Jun 09, 3:43 PM
spirifer
UK, 6 yrs

mr_Hate wrote:
But it's not a direct link. A direct link would be "we were normal people who didn't want to kill anyone, then we watched the movie and then had the desire to kill the person in the same way". At best, we have inspiration for the method of killing, but even then I wonder how true that is (without that bit, the murderers would be totally guilty, and the media would just ignore the entire thing).

How is it not a direct link? Why does a direct link have to involve someone being "normal" (whatever that may mean), and then being somehow turned into a mad killer through watching a film?

The direct link is, obviously, copying the method of killing shown in the film.

I don't understand your confusion?

Once again, for the hard of understanding, I have not said that I want horror films to be banned.

And as for the assertion that the media wouldn't have reported the murder other than for the link to the film - are you having a laugh?! Such a horrific murder would have been reported whether there was a link to a horror film or not.

The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation - Pierre Trudeau
A denizen of a right little, tight little island.

Next page