Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

Post a reply


This question is a means of preventing automated form submissions by spambots.
Smilies
:smile: :sad: :eek: :shock: :cool: :-x :razz: :oops: :evil: :twisted: :wink: :idea: :arrow: :neutral: :mrgreen:
BBCode is ON
[img] is ON
[url] is ON
Smilies are ON
Topic review
   

Expand view Topic review: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Debaser » Fri Jun 20, 2003 10:04 am

pinback wrote:Furthermore, I don't think "0" should be the baseline for any of those variables. "0" should mean: "average". Movies should get *punished* for their inadequacies.
Here, we disagree. I think an essential absence of a quality is, just that, an essential absence. I will agree that 5E is empty of substance, but I wouldn't get into the negative numbers until a stories plot and characters become so embarassingly bad, they distract. Take, for instance, What Dreams May Come, another movie with a lot of visual style. However, in that case, I found listening to Robin Williams play the world's greates guy ever and having to put up with his wife's nonstop mewling and having to deal with a set of the tritest morals ever being put forth as some sort of profound truth was enough to begin subtracting points. 5E's "substance", being essentially absent, is easy to ignore. Except for possibly Chris Tucker, who might ruin the movie, but I haven't decided yet.

by pinback » Fri Jun 20, 2003 9:07 am

Furthermore, I don't think "0" should be the baseline for any of those variables. "0" should mean: "average". Movies should get *punished* for their inadequacies.

Given that, we have Fifth Element, which gets a relatively high (but not as high as you think) grade for Style, but a very NEGATIVE rating for Substance, and what you are left with is one really mediocre movie.

And of course, each of those is weighted based on the viewer's predilection. I love me some style, don't get me wrong, but if there's nothing underneath, and it's just a bunch of weak actors phoning in a weak script for a weak story, even the most stylish movie in the world isn't going to hack it with me.

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Debaser » Fri Jun 20, 2003 8:44 am

bot wrote:No Style, No Substance = Bad
Style, But No Substance = Ok
Substance, But No Style = Ok
Style AND Substance = Good

Now if only I could write an algorithm like the above that could tell me whether or not a movie possessed style and/or substance, I would be free from having to exercise any aesthetic judgement whatever!
Well, that's fine, but I think I like an arithmetic approach better than a binary one. You know X Style + Y Substance = Z Quality. So the fact that 5E has <i>a lot</i> of style (IMO) awards it more points than it would simply for qualifying as having style. The same could be said for <i>Femme Fatale</i>, but I think there you'd need to throw in another variable for all the soft core porn.

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by bot » Fri Jun 20, 2003 5:26 am

Debaser wrote: It's got all the meat of an in-flight vegeterian meal, of course, but why is this inherently a bad thing?
It's not a bad thing! It's just also not a great thing.

In case anyone gives a damn, heck - who am I kidding? - even if it were not humanly possible to generate a greater amount of profound ennui with any other single idea, the structural underpinning of the analysis goes something like this:

No Style, No Substance = Bad
Style, But No Substance = Ok
Substance, But No Style = Ok
Style AND Substance = Good

Now if only I could write an algorithm like the above that could tell me whether or not a movie possessed style and/or substance, I would be free from having to exercise any aesthetic judgement whatever!

by Roody_Yogurt » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:33 pm

Actually, while I dislike 'the fifth element,' I liked '12 monkeys' even if 'la jette' or whatever is more concise and successful than the remake.

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Debaser » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:26 pm

bot wrote:Style over substance in both cases.
Well, of course it's style over substance. It's a big colorful music video for Eric Serra, and a showcase of the bizarre sexual entity that is Milla Jovovich with orange hair babbling like a monkey. It's a masterwork of slick direction and a triumph for the senses, both aurally and visually. It's got all the meat of an in-flight vegeterian meal, of course, but why is this inherently a bad thing?

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by bot » Wed Jun 18, 2003 4:11 pm

Debaser wrote:
The Fifth Element. Any have strong opinions on this film? Does Chris Tucker's act save or ruin it? Is Milla Jovovich's incessant babbling not the most wonderful thing ever?
Much as I resent being constantly pulled along in pinback's wake, I have to agree, again, with his analysis on this one.
It's not that great a movie (**). And Twelve Monkeys wasn't that great either - I feel obliged to add this because people who think TFE is a good movie inevitably like Twelve Monkeys as well. Style over substance in both cases.

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by pinback » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:27 am

Debaser wrote:That Terminator: Rise of the Machines is going to suck is generally regarded as a foregone conclusion, right?
Yes.
The Fifth Element. Any have strong opinions on this film?
Yes. It sucks. I know there are people that swear it's great. These people are either twelve years old, or have the intelligence quotient of smoked gouda. Or both.
So, genetalia is just ugly in general, right? Or am I alone in this?
They don't call it bumpin' uglies for nothing.

by Ice Cream Jonsey » Wed Jun 18, 2003 11:22 am

How come Eddie Furlong isn't in T3? I mean, John Carter or whatever his name is -- he's still the dude, right?

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Worm » Wed Jun 18, 2003 7:45 am

Terminator?
When, I saw the catty female robot I figured it won't be very good.
Jail Bait?
My buddy one time fucked a twelve year old when he was about eighteen maybe nineteen. For the remainder of his life he will never live it down ... he can run but even with him not around it is still funny. She looked older ... but no one cared everyone just wanted to make fun of him. When someone mentions a thirteen year old I simply point out her fucking age. I'd rather screw a chick my age.
Fifth Element?
I saw it when I was younger, when I wasn't young, and lately. I still dig it. Tucker is okay. He seems to be the same character in each movie ... but the character fit in this movie it seems. The babbling was super cool.
Genitalia?
Depends, I never was a fan of the extreme close up in porn and probably would not comment someone on their piece(s). Though in the realm of genitalia even if it is all ugly their still is the the good, the bad, and the ugly. Those are pictures of vaginas, the first two are articles and aren't two bad, the last isn't really ugly but I didn't want to go searching for genital diseases.

Re: Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Backlash A'ainst Humanity » Tue Jun 17, 2003 8:44 pm

Debaser wrote:That Terminator: Rise of the Machines is going to suck is generally regarded as a foregone conclusion, right?
NO.
There's not like, a group of people somewhere anticipating this, is there?
YES.
Well, other than the Society to Elect Arnold Schwartzenegger Governer of California, I mean.
WANKERS.
Summer's here and, for the Debaser, that probably means at least an occasional visit to a pool or beach somewhere in the city or suburbs.
EXCELLENT!
And that also means, in all likelyhood that I'm going to be faced with another round of 13-16 year old girls in swimsuits.
HA-hA!
What's the appropriate way of dealing with the inappropriate thoughts this is almost guaranteed to lead to? Shame?
COLD.
Acceptance?
WARMER.

Acquaintance rape?
BURN!!!
Should I tell my friends that it's really fucking bad form to point the pretty ones out, or just let it be?
LET IT BE.
The Fifth Element. Any have strong opinions on this film?
NO.
Does Chris Tucker's act save or ruin it?
OH GOD YES.

Is Milla Jovovich's incessant babbling not the most wonderful thing ever?
OH GOD YES.
So, genetalia is just ugly in general, right? Or am I alone in this?
NOT MINE, BUB.


FOR JOLT COUNTRY PRODUCTIONS,
BACKLASH A'AINST HUMANITY

Movie and Sex Questions, Rapid Fire Style

by Debaser » Tue Jun 17, 2003 8:38 pm

The sad part of actually getting your game code working is that then you have to do a test run through and realize just how little actual playing time your week of banging your head against the wall has actually resulted in. So, thoroughly disillusioned with IF for the moment, I present the following. Culled from the top of my head, and presented for no better reason than it doesn't require me to describe another fucking dresser in another fucking bedroom.

***

That Terminator: Rise of the Machines is going to suck is generally regarded as a foregone conclusion, right? There's not like, a group of people somewhere anticipating this, is there? Well, other than the Society to Elect Arnold Schwartzenegger Governer of California, I mean.

Summer's here and, for the Debaser, that probably means at least an occasional visit to a pool or beach somewhere in the city or suburbs. And that also means, in all likelyhood that I'm going to be faced with another round of 13-16 year old girls in swimsuits. What's the appropriate way of dealing with the inappropriate thoughts this is almost guaranteed to lead to? Shame? Acceptance? Acquaintance rape? Should I tell my friends that it's really fucking bad form to point the pretty ones out, or just let it be?

The Fifth Element. Any have strong opinions on this film? Does Chris Tucker's act save or ruin it? Is Milla Jovovich's incessant babbling not the most wonderful thing ever?

So, genetalia is just ugly in general, right? Or am I alone in this?

Top