399 réponses à ce sujet

[o Ventus]

Tbh, if The Matrix is on any top 5 list (except maybe Top 5 most overrated pieces of crap) and you leave off Predator, Raiders of the Lost Ark, or Aliens, then your list is invalid.

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

one of the greatest? hardly.

but it's one of very few postapocalyptic movies that isn't painful to watch.

i mean... if you show something ridiculous - make fun of it, emphasize, replace moping with badassery. if you don't, you'll end up being Kevin Costner.

 

What did you say?

[General TSAR]

 

Vagina Monologues 

•  

May 7, 201

That's disgusting. 

[Han Shot First]

The only issue for me with this movie is that Mel Gibson isn't Mad Max.

 

Yeah, I know...he's an awful human being. But what's that have to do with his acting ability? And he's not the first of those in Hollywood. He's not even the worst. Roman Polanski and Woody Allen still have thriving careers. Mel might be a bigot, but he never raped anyone.

 

Maybe this new guy will be awesome as Mad Max. But without having seen the movie, I can't imagine anyone except Gibson in that role.

[AresKeith]

The only issue for me with this movie is that Mel Gibson isn't Mad Max.

 

Yeah, I know...he's an awful human being. But what's that have to do with his acting ability? And he's not the first of those in Hollywood. He's not even the worst. Roman Polanski and Woody Allen still have thriving careers. Mel might be a bigot, but he never raped anyone.

 

Maybe this new guy will be awesome as Mad Max. But without having seen the movie, I can't imagine anyone except Gibson in that role.

 

Reminds me of this

 

http://krankr.com/cl..._Melly_Gibsons/

[Kaiser Arian XVII]

The only issue for me with this movie is that Mel Gibson isn't Mad Max.

 

Yeah, I know...he's an awful human being. But what's that have to do with his acting ability? And he's not the first of those in Hollywood. He's not even the worst. Roman Polanski and Woody Allen still have thriving careers. Mel might be a bigot, but he never raped anyone.

 

Maybe this new guy will be awesome as Mad Max. But without having seen the movie, I can't imagine anyone except Gibson in that role.

 

Actually that makes Mel Gibson a fitting actor for this movie!

[AlanC9]

b. It's ridiculous that some starched professor is being paid money to advise on what life is like as a sex slave. The producers could read firsthand accounts if they wanted to make it realistic. Her role is obviously to make sure it's all sanitized and palatable to the tumblr set, who still will find something to complain about of course.

Isn't it easier to pay some professor type to think about that stuff for you? It's not like her salary would pay for more than one explosion anyway.

[SlottsMachine]

I don't think I want to watch a realistic portrayal of what its like to be a sex slave. As per the article it certainly seems like the movie will use our morality on the apocalypse which to me seems pretty silly.  

[Bayonet Hipshot]

I don't think I want to watch a realistic portrayal of what its like to be a sex slave. As per the article it certainly seems like the movie will use our morality on the apocalypse which to me seems pretty silly.  

 

As someone who did research on sexual slavery, trust me, you don't. I doubt the movie will portray it properly either. 

 

I suppose its a good thing I have never heard of Mad Max until this movie came out. Don't have to watch it and I can spend that money for Tomorrowland. Brad Bird never disappoints. 

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

That's disgusting. 

Its Juvenile is what it is. if men had a show named Cocktalk people would not take it seriosly. 

[General TSAR]

Its Juvenile is what it is. if men had a show named Cocktalk people would not take it seriosly. 

Word.

 

The second you start speaking through your genitals is the second you lose any and all credibility. 

[Bison]

Word.

 

The second you start speaking through your genitals is the second you lose any and all credibility. 

I was born without a mouth and so I must speak from my urethra you racist cis scum

[Aimi]

The only issue for me with this movie is that Mel Gibson isn't Mad Max.
 
Yeah, I know...he's an awful human being. But what's that have to do with his acting ability?

The last halfway decent movie he made came out nine years ago, and he's been in a ton of crap since then.

[In Exile]

I read the interview.

 

a. I don't go to the movies for life lessons from pretentious Hollywood twits. This interview tells me that the movie is going to be as ham-handed as the anti-war and environmentalist pieces they try to sell as entertainment.

 

b. It's ridiculous that some starched professor is being paid money to advise on what life is like as a sex slave. The producers could read firsthand accounts if they wanted to make it realistic. Her role is obviously to make sure it's all sanitized and palatable to the tumblr set, who still will find something to complain about of course.

 

a. That's nonsense. It's nonsense in the sense that wanting to portray an experience (the visceral exploitative nature of a broken society) doesn't necessarily mean having some heavy-handed aesop (unless you think there are two sides to this issue?). Lots of poor movies just end up being platforms for political views, but that's very different from the experience she's actually selling. Whether she failed (or the movie fails) in executing on the vision is different from there being an issue with the vision.

 

b. That's absurd. Reading a book is in no way comparable to talking to someone who has first-hand experience, and speaking to someone who has second-hand experience (i.e., this person) is a great deal more than reading a book. More to the point, seeing as she's been in these actual regions (according to her little bio) it seems pretty disingenuous to dismiss her as some ivory tower intellectual. In any event, sanitization is the last thing she's pushing. Again, she talks about "milk farms" and women being objectified (and being nude or semi-nude). I mean, you might very well think she's just outright lying; but taking her at her word, her whole point is about making a movie that isn't clean to show the visceral horror of this type of experience. 

 

I'm sure the movie will suck. It looks like it will suck. But the review just doesn't say what you're accusing it of saying. I have even less interest in waching it if it does deliver all that she says it's mean to deliver. But that doesn't mean you're right in your description of what she says. 

[TurianRebel212]

The only issue for me with this movie is that Mel Gibson isn't Mad Max.

 

Yeah, I know...he's an awful human being. But what's that have to do with his acting ability? And he's not the first of those in Hollywood. He's not even the worst. Roman Polanski and Woody Allen still have thriving careers. Mel might be a bigot, but he never raped anyone.

 

Maybe this new guy will be awesome as Mad Max. But without having seen the movie, I can't imagine anyone except Gibson in that role.

 

I don't really think he's an awful human being. Not at all. He just got drunk and told off a cop, then later had a nasty divorce. Really.... It's not that "shocking" and "awful" behavior. 

[Han Shot First]

The last halfway decent movie he made came out nine years ago, and he's been in a ton of crap since then.

 

He has had quite a long dry spell, even before the controversies. Still, it's hard to imagine anyone else as Mad Max.

 

TurianRebel212, on 13 May 2015 - 01:10 AM, said:
I don't really think he's an awful human being. Not at all. He just got drunk and told off a cop, then later had a nasty divorce. Really.... It's not that "shocking" and "awful" behavior.

 

He also said some racist stuff and was accused of domestic violence.

 

Assuming only the former is true (its on tape, the alleged domestic violence wasn't) perhaps awful isn't the right word to use, but he still did and said some stuff that is worthy of the criticism he received.

 

On the other hand I'm not sure his career should be toast because of it. Certainly not when Hollywood still banks on people who've done far worse.

[Decepticon Leader Sully]

That's disgusting. 

[Addai]

a. That's nonsense. It's nonsense in the sense that wanting to portray an experience (the visceral exploitative nature of a broken society) doesn't necessarily mean having some heavy-handed aesop (unless you think there are two sides to this issue?). Lots of poor movies just end up being platforms for political views, but that's very different from the experience she's actually selling. Whether she failed (or the movie fails) in executing on the vision is different from there being an issue with the vision.

And now we know the film only cares about one perspective as defined and limited by the parochial views of women's studies academics. Sounds great. I just love it when Hollywood gets preachy.

b. That's absurd. Reading a book is in no way comparable to talking to someone who has first-hand experience, and speaking to someone who has second-hand experience (i.e., this person) is a great deal more than reading a book.

Absurd to choose first person accounts over secondhand lectures laden with political rhetoric? Okay.
 

I'm sure the movie will suck. It looks like it will suck. But the review just doesn't say what you're accusing it of saying.

It absolutely does.

Red Dawn and now this. LEAVE THE 80'S ALONE

[Han Shot First]

Don't forget the awful Conan & Clash of the Titans reboots.

 

...and I had such high hopes for those two.

[Treacherous J Slither]

I'm seeing this movie because Charlize Theron's Furiosa character looks absolutely amazing. I'm half chub just thinking about her!

I almost saw Snow White And The Huntsman for the same reason. Her Queen Ravenna was so...mmmmm!

[In Exile]

And now we know the film only cares about one perspective as defined and limited by the parochial views of women's studies academics. Sounds great. I just love it when Hollywood gets preachy.

 

Again, I think that's a pretty silly conclusion to draw from what amounts to marketing fluff. And, as I point out below, you apparently do love it when Hollywood gets preachy. 

 

Absurd to choose first person accounts over secondhand lectures laden with political rhetoric? Okay.

 

The political rhetoric being that sex slavery is bad? You're projecting far to much on what is being literally said in that article. 

 

As I said: the fact that the book is non-interactive puts it at a substantial disadvantage to a discussion with someone knowledge. And this assumes all of these victims of sex slavery are writing books about it, and specifically about it in a way that's relevant to the setting of the movie. Which may very well not be true, and why this person was brought in in the first place. But that's besides the point, because... 

 

 

Red Dawn and now this. LEAVE THE 80'S ALONE

 

You're lamenting the changes to an 80s war propaganda movie designed to get the American public to side with the "heroic" Mujaheddin and, well, a certain now much reviled terrorist figure who is best left forgotten and rotting?  

Red Dawn is almost the epitome of Holywood preachy propaganda. Besides being actual propaganda. 

[Milan92]

I remember seeing this trailer when I watched Age of Ultron and my first reaction was "what the f*ck did I just watch?"

 

But I'm a Tom Hardy fan and if the reviews are good I suppose I might as well check it out. Been ages since I've seen a somewhat decent action movie.

[Chewin]

Yeah, I'm just gonna ignore all this controversy and other sh*t till I've seen the movie myself.

 

Huge fan of the franchise, and Tom Hardy as Max looks cool as hell. 

[Addai]

The political rhetoric being that sex slavery is bad? You're projecting far to much on what is being literally said in that article.

Who needs a feminist professor to tell them that?

If this article had said "this is a very human story, exploring themes of human rights," we wouldn't be having this discussion. Feminism has a very specific contextual meaning. I'm just taking the article at its word that this was their approach.
 

You're lamenting the changes to an 80s war propaganda movie designed to get the American public to side with the "heroic" Mujaheddin and, well, a certain now much reviled terrorist figure who is best left forgotten and rotting?  
Red Dawn is almost the epitome of Holywood preachy propaganda. Besides being actual propaganda.

Don't overthink. Remakes suck, especially when they're laden with boring political messages. The Red Dawn reboot had to posit an entirely ridiculous notion (North Korean invasion) in order to be politically correct, because I guess we're still allowed to hate the North Koreans. The original at least had a credible premise.

[In Exile]

Who needs a feminist professor to tell them that?

If this article had said "this is a very human story, exploring themes of human rights," we wouldn't be having this discussion. Feminism has a very specific contextual meaning. I'm just taking the article at its word that this was their approach.

Don't overthink. Remakes suck, especially when they're laden with boring political messages. The Red Dawn reboot had to posit an entirely ridiculous notion (North Korean invasion) in order to be politically correct, because I guess we're still allowed to hate the North Koreans. The original at least had a credible premise.

The Red Dawn change was entirely capitalism driven. China objects quite viciously to negative portrayals of their country. Hollywood caved to the pressure of (1) a country with a lot of weight to throw at them because (2) they desperately need to make inroads in China to make enough money to justify their obscene blockbuster investment. My point is just that if you liked Red Dawn, it's pretty hypocritical to then come out against Hollywood propaganda.

Feminism has a "contextual meaning" only in the broadest sense of the word. It's almost meaningless as a label because no one who labels themselves a feminist can agree with each other. It's just the No True Scotsman fallacy made manifest. The article is clearly there for marketing fluff - they used if to reach out to a nontraditional audience because most people don't give **** whether some professor gave a movie a thumbs up and, for those who do, they assumed they'd make more money with people who'd get onside with it than people who don't.