# Films with a really shoddy Agenda



## not-bono-ever (Jul 30, 2012)

I recently had the misfortune to watch Big Jim McLean of late - McCarthy / Unamerican Activities era  John Wayne getting the boot into commies in Hawaii ( of all places ) to defend the US against the creeping red menace

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Jim_McLain

Proper rubbish, but maybe a bit LOL at the OTT rhetoric nowadays

yours ?


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 30, 2012)

ACAB - pro-fascist crap as family drama.


----------



## 5t3IIa (Jul 30, 2012)

Anti-science stuff in Independence Day


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

Fatal Attraction: Misogynistic pro-family values propaganda.

A good antidode was the low budget thriller The Stepfather from the same year, which satirised the Reagnite pro-family values propaganda which Fatal Attraction endorsed.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

_Hero_ - Dictators are great, if we didn't have them there would just be chaos.

I guess there's all the obvious ones like _Birth of a Nation, Triumph of Will_ etc


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jul 30, 2012)

Reno said:


> A good antidode was the low budget thriller The Stepfather from the same year, which satirised the Reagnite pro-family values propaganda which Fatal Attraction endorsed.


 
I remember that, or rather the beginning, when his family are massacred in the living room, while he calmly gets ready for work.


----------



## zoooo (Jul 30, 2012)

Bruce Almighty went uncomfortably preachy at the end. Didn't sit well with the rest of the film, being a silly, fun comedy.


----------



## trabuquera (Jul 30, 2012)

_Juno : _pregnant? in high school? by a lanky child not ready for adult responsibility in any way?
Clearly, what you need to do is carry the foetus to term and then give it up for adoption. Your loving parents and quickfire witticisms will make it all pass in a flash.


----------



## Fruitloop (Jul 30, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> _Hero_ - Dictators are great, if we didn't have them there would just be chaos.
> 
> I guess there's all the obvious ones like _Birth of a Nation, Triumph of Will_ etc


Is that definitely the theme of Hero? I thought it was a bit more complicated than that.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 30, 2012)

As well as _Hero:_

_Gladiator_ - fascist propaganda
_300_ - fascist propaganda
I have my suspicions about _The Dark Knight Rises_, too...


----------



## The Octagon (Jul 30, 2012)

Twilight


----------



## two sheds (Jul 30, 2012)

Virtually any cowboy film.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

What Rubbish

I can think off the top of my head a good number of westerns which have the opposite.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 30, 2012)

Green Berets, another John Wayne number


----------



## two sheds (Jul 30, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> What Rubbish
> 
> I can think off the top of my head a good number of westerns which have the opposite.


 
Indeed, in amongst the huge number that don't.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 30, 2012)

Forrest Gump,sorry Tom but life isn't like a fucking box of chocolates


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Indeed, in amongst the huge number that don't.


If there's such large number you on't have any problems naming some then.

I'll admit that there are plenty of westerns which are very much of there time when it comes to things like racism or sexism etc but I can't actually think of many (none off the top of my head) that have a dodgy agenda.

EDIT: I suppose you could call the agenda behind _Rio Bravo_ shoddy but I'd argue that the end film actually has quite a "socialist" (in the widest sense of the word) theme to it with the whole town joining forces to defeat the bad guys.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 30, 2012)

You generally agree that the indigenous american indian population should have their land stolen from them and should be pushed into reservations, and shot when they resist then?


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

Re the OP _On The Waterfront_ is another obvious example.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> You generally agree that the indigenous american indian population should have their land stolen from them and should be pushed into reservations, and shot when they resist then?


Sorry that was the agenda behind which western? Anyway your claim wasn't that there was some western that have a shoddy agenda but that virtually all of them do.

And for examples of westerns which attempted (however flawed) to try and give a sympathetic portrayal to Native Americans
_Dances With Wolves_
_The Searchers_
_Broken Lance_
_Devil's Doorway_
_Dakota Incident_


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> You generally agree that the indigenous american indian population should have their land stolen from them and should be pushed into reservations, and shot when they resist then?


 
A lot of famous Westerns don't even feature Native American characters or a conflict with them and by the 1950s Westerns featured sympathetic Native American characters and were more likely to have a liberal agenda which was critical of the treatment of Native Americans.


----------



## AverageJoe (Jul 30, 2012)

Sucker Punch didn't sit comfortably with me although I am not sure why. Apart from it being pretty awful that is...


----------



## two sheds (Jul 30, 2012)

@ Reno. Fair play - against those I'll set the huge number of 1940s/50s films with the cavalry as saviours and indians as beasts to be civilized or preferably shot.

Aren't the 'liberal' films still mostly taken from the white man's point of view? That they have the right to be there, to have taken the land in the way they did.

What happened was genocide and theft of native american land by force and by treaties that the americans went back on. Brushing what actually happened under the carpet - I'd say that was a shoddy agenda.

I'll dig out a few if you like but surely you must admit that there were loads of them, greatly outnumbering the 'liberal agenda' ones.


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> I'll dig out a few if you like but surely you must admit that there were loads of them, greatly outnumbering the 'liberal agenda' ones.


 

Not when you take into account the entirety of film history. From the 50s onwards there were a lot of Westerns with slant that was very critical of the US, something that peaked in the 70s when there were a lot of westerns with a counter culture attitude. Sure there were dodgy Westerns, especially in the 30s and 40s, but then there is more than 6 decades of Westerns after that. To say that almost all had a "shoddy agenda" just makes me think that you haven't actually watched that many Westerns.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 30, 2012)

Shitloads of them, ta. And yes, I was mainly thinking of the b&w ones of the 30s/40s/50s which I've thought of as the heydays when they churned them out in their dozens.

I still doubt that many of the later ones put the native american side. Most I'd say had the assumption if nothing else that the indians as a whole should be on the reservations, and glossed over the genocide and wholescale theft of land.


----------



## dylanredefined (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> You generally agree that the indigenous american indian population should have their land stolen from them and should be pushed into reservations, and shot when they resist then?


            Sounds about right.It pays to be a winner after all.All those natural resources and didn't come up with a decent gun.


----------



## Garek (Jul 30, 2012)

_The Matrix _

Vanguardist nonsense with religious overtones.


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Shitloads of them, ta. And yes, I was mainly thinking of the b&w ones of the 30s/40s/50s which I've thought of as the heydays when they churned them out in their dozens.
> 
> I still doubt that many of the later ones put the native american side. Most I'd say had the assumption if nothing else that the indians as a whole should be on the reservations, and glossed over the genocide and wholescale theft of land.


 

Just because a Western isn't high minded enough to put across the Native American side, doesn't in itself make it a dodgy film. How are famous westerns like High Noon, 3:10 to Yuma or McCabe and Mrs Miller dodgy ? Just because they aren't told from the POV of Native Americans ? The stories of those films have nothing to do with them.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> I still doubt that many of the later ones put the native american side.


I just gave you a bunch of examples (four from the 50s) who's agenda is sympathetic to the native americans (even if some of the content is pretty terrible from todays POV - i.e. white actors "redding up")


----------



## Wolveryeti (Jul 30, 2012)

American Beauty: There's more to life than money, maaaaan. Look at the plastic bag carefully. It's symbolic meaning is that the scriptwriter has robbed you and is metaphorically tossing himself off in your face while laughing hysterically. To the bank.


----------



## marty21 (Jul 30, 2012)

not-bono-ever said:


> I recently had the misfortune to watch Big Jim McLean of late - McCarthy / Unamerican Activities era John Wayne getting the boot into commies in Hawaii ( of all places ) to defend the US against the creeping red menace
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Jim_McLain
> 
> ...


 putting that mother on my lovefilm list


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jul 30, 2012)

The Ten Commandments - God and Moses are the same person - Charlton Heston!


----------



## Psychonaut (Jul 30, 2012)

Titanic (1943)


----------



## youngian (Jul 30, 2012)

Early 70s Carry On-

Carry on Girls- Killjoy feminists sabotage seaside beauty contest staged by bent councillor Sidney Fiddler
Carry on Camping- A group of schoolgirls are 'rescued' from evil hippy festival by two middle aged men, who have spent the weekend watching them shower naked.
Carry on Convenience- Strike-happy Bolshie workers are shown up as hen pecked cowards when their wives chase them back to work.

Hands up though I still laugh everytime.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 30, 2012)

The Woodsman - male paedophiles who rape boys are more abominable than ones who rape girls
Taken - Europe is a dangerous place full of evil swarthy traffickers who want to sell your daughter to Arabs
Time To Kill - yay vigilante justice and pandering to racism!


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

Psychonaut said:


> Titanic (1943)


 
You don't say ! A Nazi propaganda film having a questionable agenda ? Who would have thunked it ?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 30, 2012)

youngian said:


> Carry on Convenience- Strike-happy Bolshie workers are shown up as hen pecked cowards when their wives chase them back to work.


Carry On At Your Convenience is the first film I saw and thought "this is political propaganda". Everything seemed unhappily shoehorned into a union-bashing script. I was quite young and not at all political, but I remember thinking something about it just didn't fit in with the others, which were full of cheeky chaps getting one over on the bosses.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 30, 2012)

The Man in The White Suit - anti-union filth.


----------



## youngian (Jul 30, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> The Man in The White Suit - anti-union filth.


 
Doesn't it look pro-Green anti-consumerist now?



Orang Utan said:


> Taken - Europe is a dangerous place full of evil swarthy traffickers who want to sell your daughter to Arabs


 
There's a very funny Kermode review about how reactionary this film is.

"Don't go to Uryoop"


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 30, 2012)

Gingerman said:


> Forrest Gump,sorry Tom but life isn't like a fucking box of chocolates


 
Agreed. One of the vilest films ever made. Racist and sexist shite celebrating servility and consumerism beneath the veneer of liberal sentimentality.


----------



## ATOMIC SUPLEX (Jul 30, 2012)

The Devil Wears Prada. Yeah, just be a housewife or whatever.

Diary of a shopaholic. Problem with shopping? Just marry someone rich.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 30, 2012)

Every one of the Death Wish films.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 30, 2012)

Who Dares Wins,a pile of aul PR guff on behalf of the SAS masquerading as a film.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 30, 2012)

Dirty Harry was obviously a tad dubious but I think The Enforcer was worse. More PC Gone Mad that lets leftist terrorists (of course, only after the money really) steal rockets and stuff, as well as affirmative action!


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 30, 2012)

youngian said:
			
		

> Doesn't it look pro-Green anti-consumerist now?


That's true. Also, a forerunner of third position evolian fascism. Beyond both communism and capitalism. Beyond right and left.


----------



## discokermit (Jul 30, 2012)

the wind in the willows. fascist.


----------



## Knotted (Jul 30, 2012)

discokermit said:


> the wind in the willows. fascist.


 
Indeed. Anti-working class... and anti-weasel/stoat/ferret.


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

ATOMIC SUPLEX said:


> The Devil Wears Prada. Yeah, just be a housewife or whatever.


 
It's a film about women climbing the career ladder, not about becoming housewifes.


----------



## 8115 (Jul 30, 2012)

Contagion, remember to wash your hands and cover your mouth when you sneeze if there's a flu outbreak.

Actually I think that's quite a good agenda but it was paper thin.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jul 30, 2012)

The Batman films. I have my concerns about the fascistic nature of Wayne when he's caul'd up.


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

Irreversible is rabidly homophobic.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2012)

Gingerman said:


> Who Dares Wins,a pile of aul PR guff on behalf of the SAS masquerading as a film.


But great fun, and with a stirring soundtrack.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Dirty Harry was obviously a tad dubious but I think The Enforcer was worse. More PC Gone Mad that lets leftist terrorists (of course, only after the money really) steal rockets and stuff, as well as affirmative action!



File alongside _The Star Chamber_


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 30, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> The Man in The White Suit - anti-union filth.


On the same theme there's that terrible anti-union film starring Richard Attenborough - _The Long Silence?_

EDIT: _The Angry Silence_


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Virtually any cowboy film.


surely not 'two mules for sister sara'


----------



## Sue (Jul 30, 2012)

Reno said:


> It's a film about women climbing the career ladder, not about becoming housewifes.


 
But at the end the main character's partner has taken a job in a completely different city as a chef (or some other job with long and unsociable hours) without telling her but that's okay whereas her long hours job is *bad*?  Rubbish film and not remembering it completely correctly no doubt but remember thinking that seemed a tad one-sided and shit.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2012)




----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2012)




----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


>


If Dirk had stuck to a North London machete he might have got away with it. And had his garden dug over for free.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 30, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Agreed. One of the vilest films ever made. Racist and sexist shite celebrating servility and consumerism beneath the veneer of liberal sentimentality.


 
I never picked up on any of this stuff when I watched it.  Sure, the main character is extremely unquestioning but the fact that things kind of turn out ok for him seems to be down to randomness.  Though it's incredibly implausible, I'll grant you that.


----------



## Reno (Jul 30, 2012)

Sue said:


> But at the end the main character's partner has taken a job in a completely different city as a chef (or some other job with long and unsociable hours) without telling her but that's okay whereas her long hours job is *bad*? Rubbish film and not remembering it completely correctly no doubt but remember thinking that seemed a tad one-sided and shit.


 
I don't think it's very good either, but in the end she goes for a job at a newspaper which the Meryl Streep/Anna Wintour character recommends her for in a backhanded way. Which means she isn't giving up on a career in publishing.


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2012)




----------



## Firky (Jul 30, 2012)

Braveheart,

Prince Edward portrayed as a big effeminate poof - that gets thrown out of a window for being camp. Seems to neglect the fact he had about half a dozen kids to several women.


----------



## Sue (Jul 30, 2012)

Reno said:


> I don't think it's very good either, but in the end she goes for a job at a newspaper which the Meryl Streep/Anna Wintour character recommends her for in a backhanded way. Which means she isn't giving up on a career in publishing.


 
Yeah, still a bit one-sided stuff I thought. (Though that;s in passing and not the agenda of the film.)


----------



## Pickman's model (Jul 30, 2012)

firky said:


> Braveheart,
> 
> Prince Edward portrayed as a big effeminate poof - that gets thrown out of a window for being camp. Seems to neglect the fact he had about half a dozen kids to several women.







prince edward recently


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 30, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> That's true. Also, a forerunner of third position evolian fascism. Beyond both communism and capitalism. Beyond right and left.


 

I have just googled Evolian fascism cos Id never heard of him

I have to sort my life out


----------



## Firky (Jul 30, 2012)

Pickman's model said:


> prince edward recently


 

You know I mean Eddie the II, the one who was eaten by that French wolf


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jul 30, 2012)

marty21 said:


> putting that mother on my lovefilm list


blud

its fuckin terrible, but  the scenes at the Unamerican activities opening scene are truly WTF


----------



## Firky (Jul 30, 2012)

Signs Knowing was pretty full on Scientology wank but so transparent that it rendered it laughable.


----------



## biggus dickus (Jul 30, 2012)

Star Wars - thinly veiled Jedi recruiting video


----------



## Stigmata (Jul 30, 2012)

firky said:


> Signs was pretty full on Scientology wank but so transparent that it rendered it laughable.


 
Was it? Mad Mel's into the Catholic stuff in a pretty big way so I thought he wouldn't be up for that sort of thing.


----------



## DaveCinzano (Jul 30, 2012)

PlaidDragon said:


> The Batman films. I have my concerns about the fascistic nature of Wayne when he's caul'd up.


Really? I don't think anyone's ever mentioned that before.


----------



## Firky (Jul 31, 2012)

Stigmata said:


> Was it? Mad Mel's into the Catholic stuff in a pretty big way so I thought he wouldn't be up for that sort of thing.


 
Sorry, I was thinking of Knowing (Nicholas Cage).

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448011/

I still had a hardon of rage for Mel.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Jul 31, 2012)

Team America - World Police.
Beneath the OTT gross out humour its shameless right wing libetariansim. Fearlessly rips into hollywood liberals. Completely ignores Bush and co.

Dumbo - the clowns are a thinly disguised attack on striking disney workers.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Dumbo - the clowns are a thinly disguised attack on striking disney workers.


 
Oh, I never knew that. At the same time it's the rare Disney film that can be read as a queer allegory and which celebrates the freak who doesn't have to conform at the end. It's very much about the outsider. When I was little, Dumbo was the one Disney character I identified with.


----------



## PlaidDragon (Jul 31, 2012)

DaveCinzano said:


> Really? I don't think anyone's ever mentioned that before.


 
Hilarious. I wasn't claiming to be groundbreaking, just chipping in.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Shall we bother with slasher films in which young people are butchered by some reactionary psycho just for having sex and smoking weed? I doubt the film-makers were as conservative as the Jasons and the Michaels.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> Shall we bother with slasher films in which young people are butchered by some reactionary psycho just for having sex and smoking weed? I doubt the film-makers were as conservative as the Jasons and the Michaels.


 
No, lets not bother.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Men,_Women,_and_Chainsaws


----------



## gosub (Jul 31, 2012)

Charlie and Chocolate factory.: Factory owner avoids investigation of several industrial accidents by making a child accountable manager


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2012)

8ball said:


> I never picked up on any of this stuff when I watched it. Sure, the main character is extremely unquestioning but the fact that things kind of turn out ok for him seems to be down to randomness. Though it's incredibly implausible, I'll grant you that.


 
It's not meant to be random, it's a quite deliberate portrait of the conservative american dream. Gump represents quintessential 1950's America, (symbolised by his clothes throughout the movie). He loves god and doctor pepper and blindly obeys all authority, coming up on top everytime. By contrast, his love interest is swayed by every destructive counter-culture that contaminates American life - from stripbars to the anti-vietnam war movement to snorting cocaine in disco clubs. Nothing but disaster befalls her. The message is surely starkly obvious: In America anybody can succeed, even simple Gump, provided that they conform unquestioningly to traditional values and authority.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 31, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> On the same theme there's that terrible anti-union film starring Richard Attenborough - _The Long Silence?_
> 
> EDIT: _The Angry Silence_


Yep a hideous film now rarely mentioned - wouldn't say it's agenda was that hidden though - it's a straightforward heroisation of scabbing and a claim that all class conflict is the result of shadowy communist meddling, not the normal operation of capitalism . Here's a quote from dear old_ treasure of the nation_ dickie at the time (and btw, he didn't just star in it, he produced it, it was his baby, his personal project) when faced with criticism:



> This sort of fascist behaviour is just what the film is about. Mob rule by a few scheming communist


----------



## mrsfran (Jul 31, 2012)

Grease. If the person you fancy is embarressed to be seen with you, you should change everything about yourself.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Most teenage butterfly/ugly ducking films are like that. They start off telling us that it's ok to be odd, but the heroine invariably ends up conforming and prettifying herself.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jul 31, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> On the same theme there's that terrible anti-union film starring Richard Attenborough - _The Long Silence?_
> 
> EDIT: _The Angry Silence_


 
Good call.  

Awful film.


----------



## The Octagon (Jul 31, 2012)

firky said:


> Braveheart,
> 
> Prince Edward portrayed as a big effeminate poof - that gets thrown out of a window for being camp. Seems to neglect the fact he had about half a dozen kids to several women.



Point of order, it's the Prince's lover that takes the window exit in Braveheart, not Eddie himself (although he does squeal hilariously)


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> Most teenage butterfly/ugly ducking films are like that. They start off telling us that it's ok to be odd, but the heroine invariably ends up conforming and prettifying herself.


 
Apparently there's a Paris Hilton film called 'the hottie and the nottie' in which the ugly duckling character discovers her inner beauty through plastic surgery.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Apparently there's a Paris Hilton film called 'the hottie and the nottie' in which the ugly duckling character discovers her inner beauty through plastic surgery.


 
You just reminded me to put that one on my Lovefilm list.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jul 31, 2012)

Debbie Does Dallas II


----------



## trabuquera (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> Most teenage butterfly/ugly ducking films are like that. They start off telling us that it's ok to be odd, but the heroine invariably ends up conforming and prettifying herself.


 
Oooh, this made me think of two more:

Pretty in Pink - being a quirky individualist from a lower-middle class background will of course guarantee you the true love of a spoilt preppy yuppie who will care for you right back, and you'll both conquer the class system together thanks to a nifty bit of sewing.

And the Worst Agenda of All Possible Agendas film:

Pretty Woman. Because _of course_ prostitution is a glamorous career choice where your only dilemma is in choosing which grey-fox millionaire will be allowed to take you shopping and _of course _you'll end up getting a nice rich husband out of it.


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 31, 2012)

Love Actually - manipulative rubbish throughout of course, but the 'pm and the tealady' thread is just disgusting - blatant attempt to humanise Blair at a time when it was becoming nakedly obvious what a cunt he was.  But look! He says things like "um..." and "right..." just like he's one of us! And he's not as ugly as most previous office holders! He must be ok then!


----------



## billy_bob (Jul 31, 2012)

trabuquera said:


> Pretty Woman. Because _of course_ prostitution is a glamorous career choice where your only dilemma is in choosing which grey-fox millionaire will be allowed to take you shopping and _of course _you'll end up getting a nice rich husband out of it.


 
Ah, but it's only about the ones with a heart of gold - you know, the ones who accept their burden in life with a feisty but ultimately chirpy and compliant demeanour.  Not those miserable crack-addicted teeth-missing ones.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

trabuquera said:


> And the Worst Agenda of All Possible Agendas film:


 

It's bad, but there is far worse.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> It's not meant to be random, it's a quite deliberate portrait of the conservative american dream. Gump represents quintessential 1950's America, (symbolised by his clothes throughout the movie). He loves god and doctor pepper and blindly obeys all authority, coming up on top everytime. By contrast, his love interest is swayed by every destructive counter-culture that contaminates American life - from stripbars to the anti-vietnam war movement to snorting cocaine in disco clubs. Nothing but disaster befalls her. The message is surely starkly obvious: In America anybody can succeed, even simple Gump, provided that they conform unquestioningly to traditional values and authority.


 
I figured that because the way things turn out well for him in a haphazard, random, implausible manner, rather than in any systematic way arising from benevolent authorities, that all it can really be taken to say is that if you are dumb and unquestioning then very occasionally you may get lucky.


----------



## Garek (Jul 31, 2012)

_The Breakfast Club_

They 'Barbify' the alternative girl.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Garek said:


> _The Breakfast Club_
> 
> They 'Barbify' the alternative girl.


That was such a massive deflating letdown


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

The Wizard of Oz glorifies a thief and a murderer.

Dorothy crushes the Wicked Witch of the East to death with her house. When the victims sister arrives, Dorothy loots the corpse for her shoes and goes on the run. By any inheritance right in the world the ruby slippers belong to the Witches only relative, the Wicked Witch of the West. Rather than giving her the shoes, the teenage deliquent kills the WWW and leaves the country.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2012)

8ball said:


> I figured that because the way things turn out well for him in a haphazard, random, implausible manner, rather than in any systematic way arising from benevolent authorities, that all it can really be taken to say is that if you are dumb and unquestioning then very occasionally you may get lucky.


 
The American dream doesn't rest on the idea of benevolence nor the idea that everybody will make it, but rather that everybody has the _potential_ to make it if they put the effort in or find their special talent. The film certainly has a fantasy element but that doesn't mean there isn't symbolic content to that fantasy. The serial successes of Gump and serial failures of his love interest cannot be taken to be purely contingent. That Gump embodies traditonal conservative American values (religious, respects authority, non-promiscuous etc) and the love interest rebels against them (taking part in various counter-culture movements) is surely not coincidental.


----------



## ohmyliver (Jul 31, 2012)

The Wizard of OZ is actually a warning about Anon and the internets.... i.e. teenager/script kiddie steals Ruby, and then teams up with a furry, a webbot, and a conspiracy nut, unmasks the powers that be, and then kills the WWW.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 31, 2012)

Red Dawn,Rambo 2 and 3


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> ... that Gump embodies traditonal conservative American values (religious, respects authority, non-promiscuous etc) and the love interest rebels against them (taking part in various counter-culture movements) is surely not coincidental.


 
But there's no systematic reason for the way things turn out other than dumb luck, so it would seem that to take it as a plausible endorsement of traditional conservative values would entail a good amount of magical thinking (ie. act in a traditionally conservative way and dumb luck will smile on you).

I think you need to already believe a whole bunch of things in a particular way in order to absorb that message (assuming that's the itention).  Plus I think some of Gump's qualities, such as his acceptance of people who are 'other', his lack of malice towards just about everyone and his treament of people as equals and his complete lack of any urge to punish are hardly typical right-wing traits.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 31, 2012)

Birth of a Nation,a recruitment promo for the KKK


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2012)

8ball said:


> But there's no systematic reason for the way things turn out other than dumb luck, so it would seem that to take it as a plausible endorsement of traditional conservative values would entail a good amount of magical thinking (ie. act in a traditionally conservative way and dumb luck will smile on you)..


 
Like I said, there's a fantastical element, but there is a very unsubtle structure to the fantasy. Further, there are two different types of luck. There's pure luck and making your own luck. Pure luck would be me going out into the street and finding a fiver on the ground. Making my own luck would be to go out and collect money for charity and be 'lucky' enough to have somebody generous enough to donate a fiver. If luck plays a role in Forrest Gump, it's the latter type. Gump is 'lucky' enough to have all these fantastical things happen to him but they only happen to him because he was following the right path in the first place. The nexus between his actions and his good luck are as in tact as whatsherface's actions and her bad luck.



8ball said:


> I think you need to already believe a whole bunch of things in a particular way in order to absorb that message (assuming that's the itention). Plus I think some of Gump's qualities, such as his acceptance of people who are 'other', his lack of malice towards just about everyone and his treament of people as equals and his complete lack of any urge to punish are hardly typical right-wing traits.


 
Gump, due to his inabilities, is not the avatar through which the malice is channelled in the film. The audience are invited to feel malice on his behalf at the various caricatures throughout the film. It's notable for example that the black character's sympathetically portrayed in the movie are (like Gump) willing canon fodder for yankee imperialism in Vietnam (which strangely doesn't appear to have many Vietnamese people populating it) whereas the black panthers are reduced to irrational, demagogic, misogynist scum. Just like the anti-war guys being foulmouthed hippy slackers.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Did you do an essay on this at Uni?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Jul 31, 2012)

I studied law.


----------



## 8ball (Jul 31, 2012)

It's ages since I watched it tbf.


----------



## gosub (Jul 31, 2012)

ohmyliver said:


> The Wizard of OZ is actually a warning about Anon and the internets.... i.e. teenager/script kiddie steals Ruby, and then teams up with a furry, a webbot, and a conspiracy nut, unmasks the powers that be, and then kills the WWW.


Makes a change from evil bankers and the gold standard


----------



## MooChild (Jul 31, 2012)

No one mentioned Pretty Woman yet?


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

MooChild said:


> No one mentioned Pretty Woman yet?


 
Top of the page.


----------



## Gingerman (Jul 31, 2012)

Carry on at Your Convenience,a def anti- union bias.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

The twilight series, it's essentially a means of grooming teenage girls for controlling abusive relationships.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

revol68 said:


> The twilight series, it's essentially a means of grooming teenage girls for controlling abusive relationships.


 
That's not really how it comes across in the films as she seems to be the controlling one (in a passive aggressive way) which is why so many people hate that character. What bothers me about it is that it peddles some Christian chastity vow thing they go in for in Mormon and fundamentalist communities. Once she is married the sex is rough, but that's her choice too.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> That's not really how it comes across in the films as she seems to be the controlling one (in a passive aggressive way) which is why so many people hate that character. What bothers me about it is that it peddles some Christian chastity vow thing they go in for in Mormon and fundamentalist communities. Once she is married the sex is rough, but that's her choice too.


 
the rough sex doesn't bother me, jesus that's the least problematic thing.

It's the whole glamourising of a young women making some old boring dickhead the centre of her universe and the whole lamb lying by the lion bullshit, like she gets off on the fact he could kill her, and not in a bit of fantasy role play thing.

And in the second film where she starts doing wreckless things to get "ghost Edwards" attention, lord almighty.

Edward is possibly the most boring cunt in the world, he's been alive for how many centuries, seen how many things and yet he has nothing to say. 

I have to say Team Jacob for me, even if he's a bit dumb.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Fatal Attraction: Misogynistic pro-family values propaganda.


 
Never thought about it like that before.....

Maybe it's actually equal-opportunity though: make the headcase a woman this time. Although I guess it was done before, in Play Misty For Me. Another fine example of creeping famili-ism.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Picking up on subtext has never been your strong point. 

It was a film that really pissed off feminists at the time and there was a lot of debate around it.


----------



## youngian (Jul 31, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Team America - World Police.
> Beneath the OTT gross out humour its shameless right wing libetariansim. Fearlessly rips into hollywood liberals. Completely ignores Bush and co.
> 
> Dumbo - the clowns are a thinly disguised attack on striking disney workers.


 
Team America and their antics are the Bush satire but I get the same vibe from them though. Parker and Stone like to say "we have a go a everybody" so they don't have to put their heads above the trench.
I bet they support Ron 'slash welfare and tax but you can smoke dope'  Paul.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

revol68 said:


> the rough sex doesn't bother me, jesus that's the least problematic thing.
> 
> It's the whole glamourising of a young women making some old boring dickhead the centre of her universe and the whole lamb lying by the lion bullshit, like she gets off on the fact he could kill her, and not in a bit of fantasy role play thing.
> 
> ...


 
Edward is boring, but that's the result of trying to make a potentially threatening creature non-threatening. Which is why I don't think this is about an abusive relationship. Bella is only inflicting abuse on herself.

I can't get on Team Jacob because Taylor Lautner is the most inept actor to ever star in a major film series. He is up there with the kid who played the young Darth Vader in The Phantom Menace.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Edward is boring, but that's the result of trying to make a potentially threatening creature non-threatening. Which is why I don't think this is about an abusive relationship. Bella is only inflicting abuse on herself.
> 
> I can't get on Team Jacob because Taylor Lautner is the most inept actor to ever star in a major film series. He is up there with the kid who played the young Darth Vader in The Phantom Menace.


 
Of course but that's the problem, the film romanticises the idea of the barely concealed violence. Alot of abusive relationships are sustained by the abused. But like I said it's a grooming tool, so it should hardly be surprising that Bella pursues it, that's the point of grooming (not that i'm speaking from authority!).

All in all I don't think the fucked up fantasies of a repressed mormon housewife are that good a thing to market to young women, then again most of the teenage girls in the cinema (my ex made me go for the lols) found it as stupidly hilarious as we did.


----------



## two sheds (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Not when you take into account the entirety of film history. From the 50s onwards there were a lot of Westerns with slant that was very critical of the US, something that peaked in the 70s when there were a lot of westerns with a counter culture attitude. Sure there were dodgy Westerns, especially in the 30s and 40s, but then there is more than 6 decades of Westerns after that. To say that almost all had a "shoddy agenda" just makes me think that you haven't actually watched that many Westerns.


 
See how little you know comrade, they even led to the Vietnam war.

http://www.jfredmacdonald.com/trm/111tvwestern.htm





> The Western flourished on Cold War television. Whether in its original juvenile orientation, or in the adult formulation that emerged in the mid-1950s, the Western was relevant drama embodying the psychology of the East-West struggle. In this time of international tension and generalized social anxiety, the Western offered answers. In it powerless, perhaps frustrated, viewers found stylized tales of how their forefathers had triumphed over antisocial forces.
> 
> There were morals in the Western. The warm and friendly heroes of such programs believed in process, rules, and order. Sometimes they were law enforcement officers paid to uphold the regulations of civilized life. Sometimes they were do-gooders volunteering to rid the settlement of its disruptive elements. However they appeared, these heroes always preferred rational methods in upholding the law. But, when compelled by enemies, the Western stalwarts could be tough. These decent people were always prepared to use physical strength and firearms to achieve their just goal.
> 
> ...


 
I make that about 3,000 as against the paltry dozen or so you've been able to name, plus of course

"Badges, we don't need no stinking badges".

Can't remember the name of the fillum but there was one a few years ago showing a old western film in front of an African audience and they were all cheering the indians every time they appeared and booing the cavalry.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

two sheds said:


> See how little you know comrade, they even led to the Vietnam war.
> 
> http://www.jfredmacdonald.com/trm/111tvwestern.htm
> 
> ...


 

Jesus, what a retardedly patronising and one dimensional understanding of culture and how people relate to it.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Why are small men always so rude?


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> Why are small men always so rude?


 
Why are liberals always such smug patronising cunts?


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

two sheds said:


> See how little you know comrade, they even led to the Vietnam war.





two sheds said:


> http://www.jfredmacdonald.com/trm/111tvwestern.htm
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
We were talking about western *films*, so why are you showing me a link that is all about TV westerns ? TV was a far more conservative medium than film was from the 50s to 70s culturally lagging behind what was going on in films, so it has little to do with what I was talking about. I was talking about the revisionist, more liberal western films from the mid-50s onwards.


----------



## Termite Man (Jul 31, 2012)

Gingerman said:


> Red Dawn,Rambo 2 and 3


 

I agree with Rambo 2 but by putting it with Red Dawn and Rambo 3 I assume you think it's pro american/anti communist propaganda when that is far from the truth.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 31, 2012)

trabuquera said:


> Pretty Woman. Because _of course_ prostitution is a glamorous career choice where your only dilemma is in choosing which grey-fox millionaire will be allowed to take you shopping and _of course _you'll end up getting a nice rich husband out of it.


the book is more subtle - no happy ending, riuchard gere pulling up in a limo for starters - but this is hollywood, so a feelgood ending is a must. The same is true for Secretary - in the book they just go their seperate ways - in the film they get married 



Kaka Tim said:


> Team America - World Police.
> Beneath the OTT gross out humour its shameless right wing libetariansim. Fearlessly rips into hollywood liberals. Completely ignores Bush and co.


i came away thinking that too


Reno said:


> The Wizard of Oz glorifies a thief and a murderer.
> 
> Dorothy crushes the Wicked Witch of the East to death with her house. When the victims sister arrives, Dorothy loots the corpse for her shoes and goes on the run. By any inheritance right in the world the ruby slippers belong to the Witches only relative, the Wicked Witch of the West. Rather than giving her the shoes, the teenage deliquent kills the WWW and leaves the country.


The wizard of oz is actually a parable about the gold standard
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wo...The_Gold_Standard_representation_of_the_story
theres a better acount than off wikip. he wrote another blatant political alegory from what ive been shown. I buy it

i havent read this, but looks okay at a glance http://www.usagold.com/gildedopinion/oz.html


redsquirrel said:


> _Hero_ - Dictators are great, if we didn't have them there would just be chaos.


Definitely - I'll add another Chinese one, Bruce Lee's Fist of Fury - one long anti-Japanese propaganda job from start to finish - though tbf the Chinese had plenty reason to be pissed off with the Japanese.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

ska invita said:


> The wizard of oz is actually a parable about the gold standard
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wo...The_Gold_Standard_representation_of_the_story
> theres a better acount than off wikip. he wrote another blatant political alegory from what ive been shown. .


 
What I said was actually supposed to be a joke.


----------



## ska invita (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> What I said was actually supposed to be a joke.


i know, im just saying that WIz of OZ has an agenda


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 31, 2012)

The Oz series of books are quite a strange mix of working-class self-determination / disrespect for worldly authority, absolute monarchy / unchangeably defined social roles, and worship of powerful women.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Picking up on subtext has never been your strong point.
> 
> It was a film that really pissed off feminists at the time and there was a lot of debate around it.


 
Feminists were pissed off by the portrayal of a needy, psychotic woman in a film?


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The Oz series of books are quite a strange mix of working-class self-determination / disrespect for worldly authority, absolute monarchy / unchangeably defined social roles, and worship of powerful women.


 
I liked her red shoes.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

No, they were pissed off that a feminist was portrayed as a psycho bitch from hell


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> No, they were pissed off that a feminist was portrayed as a psycho bitch from hell


 
well that's just disgusting prejudice against mentally ill immigrants.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Fatal Attraction: Misogynistic pro-family values propaganda.
> 
> A good antidode was the low budget thriller The Stepfather from the same year, which satirised the Reagnite pro-family values propaganda which Fatal Attraction endorsed.


 
They released Black Widow that same year, too. I guess it was a bad year for feminism.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> No, they were pissed off that a feminist was portrayed as a psycho bitch from hell


 
I know. It's not like it's possible for a feminist to suffer from mental illness.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> A lot of famous Westerns don't even feature Native American characters or a conflict with them and by the 1950s Westerns featured sympathetic Native American characters and were more likely to have a liberal agenda which was critical of the treatment of Native Americans.


 

.... if a liberal agenda includes refering to aboriginal people as 'redskins'....


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I know. It's not like it's possible for a feminist to suffer from mental illness.


 
Valerie Solanas , though the further into Mad Men I get the less crazy I think she was.


----------



## butchersapron (Jul 31, 2012)

ska invita said:


> i know, im just saying that WIz of OZ has an agenda


It has, you're right - but it's not that one.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Valerie Solanas , though the further into Mad Men I get the less crazy I think she was.


 
I haven't watched Mad Men yet.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I haven't watched Mad Men yet.


 
I still stand by my initial assessment of it being the Soprano's on it's menopause but it's pretty good as far as it goes.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I still stand by my initial assessment of it being the Soprano's on it's menopause but it's pretty good as far as it goes.


 Lillyhammer is also the Sopranos at menopause...


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> They released Black Widow that same year, too. I guess it was a bad year for feminism.


 
A film isn't anti-feminist just because it features a female villain. It really helps to look at the context within which the characters are placed.

Look at what the two female villains of the film are contrasted against.

Black Widow was actually quite unusual for its queer subtext, where a female investigator becomes obsessed with a deadly femme fatale. And the film contrasts a female serial killer with a smart, succesful independent woman who in the end catches her nemesis by using her wits.

Alex of Fatal Attraction is the nighmare of any Republican family values nut, an independent, single, successful career woman. As the film shows us, such a woman couldn't possibly be right in the head, so after Michael Douglas impregnates her and dumps her, she goes bunny boiler. And she gets contrasted against Anne Archer's wholesome homemaker, the ideal of conservative feminity who in the end blast away a pregnant woman with a mental illness to a cheering audience. Because this is how conflict gets resolved in Reagan's America. The sanctity of nuclear family is therefore restored.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

He blasts her away AND drowns her in the bath


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> .... if a liberal agenda includes refering to aboriginal people as 'redskins'....


 
Why should a historical film refer to Native American's in terms that appease modern, politically correct sensibilities when people at the time didn't. Should a historical film about slavery have to refer to black people as "people of colour" when white people called them something very different ?

And many Westerns don't even feature Native Americans or a conflict with them, so not every Westerns refers to 'redskins"


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> He blasts her away AND drowns her in the bath


 
No, he tries to drown her and Anne Archer blows her away.


----------



## Orang Utan (Jul 31, 2012)

Oops, this is why I should watch films more than once I suppose!


----------



## N_igma (Jul 31, 2012)

Garek said:


> _The Breakfast Club_
> 
> They 'Barbify' the alternative girl.


 
She looks a lot nicer at the end of the film and there's nothing 'Barbie' like about her:


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> A film isn't anti-feminist just because it features a female villain. It really helps to look at the context within which the characters are placed.
> 
> Look at what the two female villains of the film are contrasted against.
> 
> Black Widow was actually quite unusual for its queer subtext, where a female investigator becomes obsessed with a deadly femme fatale. And the film contrast a female serial killer with a smart, succesful independent woman who in the end catches her nemesis by using her wits..


 
A 'femme fatale'? She's a psychotic killer who makes her way through life by preying upon hapless men who have the ill fortune to become enamoured with her.

Is that sort of character somehow more acceptable to feminist doctrine?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Alex of Fatal Attraction is the nighmare of any Republican family values nut, an independent, single, successful career woman. As the film shows us, such a woman couldn't possibly be right in the head, so after Michael Douglas impregnates her and dumps her, she goes bunny boiler. And she gets contrasted against Anne Archer's wholesome homemaker, the ideal of conservative feminity who in the end blast away a pregnant woman with a mental illness to a cheering audience. Because this is how conflict gets resolved in Reagan's America. The sanctity of nuclear family is therefore restored.


 
Fatal Attraction is a remake of Play Misty For Me, dressed up in the upwardly mobile clothing of the go-getter 80s.

There is no larger agenda here than the simple placing of butts in theatre seats.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> Why should a historical film refer to Native American's in terms that appease modern, politically correct sensibilities when people at the time didn't. Should a historical film about slavery have to refer to black people as "people of colour" when white people called them something very different ?
> 
> And many Westerns don't even feature Native Americans or a conflict with them, so not every Westerns refers to 'redskins"


 
You had mentioned that by the 50s, Hollywood westerns were displaying liberal sympathies toward the situation of aboriginal people.

I'm questioning that. One of the indicators that Hollywood wasn't yet taking a liberal approach to aboriginals, was the 'liberal' use of the word 'redskin'. They needn't have referred to them as 'aboriginals', but 'indian' might have sufficed.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Arguably the sea-change in Hollywood's portrayal of aboriginals came with Little Big Man.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> A 'femme fatale'? She's a psychotic killer who makes her way through life by preying upon hapless men who have the ill fortune to become enamoured with her.
> 
> Is that sort of character somehow more acceptable to feminist doctrine?


 
"Femme fatales' *are* women who prey on hapeless (and not so hapless) men by using their sexuality and Black Widow clearly sets itself up as a modern film noir. 

In many cases they are psychotic, like the femme fatales in classic film noirs like Angel Face or Leave Her to Heaven. The only modern twist in Black Widow (even the pulpy title screams film noir!) is that the investigator is a woman.



Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Fatal Attraction is a remake of Play Misty For Me, dressed up in the upwardly mobile clothing of the go-getter 80s.
> 
> There is no larger agenda here than the simple placing of butts in theatre seats.


 
It's at best a rip off of Play Misty for Me and not a remake (there is a difference) and as I said before, you seem to be utterly clueless about about the concept subtext in films.

That's enough Canuck craziness for one evening for me. Good night.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

N_igma said:


> She looks a lot nicer at the end of the film and there's nothing 'Barbie' like about her:


She was cooler before, you square.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

edit


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

Reno said:


> "That's enough Canuck craziness for one evening for me. Good night.


 
Why do you find it necessary to throw in this pompous bullshit?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Fatal Attraction is a remake of Play Misty For Me, dressed up in the upwardly mobile clothing of the go-getter 80s.
> 
> There is no larger agenda here than the simple placing of butts in theatre seats.


Dude. It's transparently misogynist and reactionary. "Think twice before having an affair, because while there's obviously nothing wrong with it in principle, women are psycho bitches".


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

> you seem to be utterly clueless about about the concept subtext in films.


 
Stuff it, you pompous, condescending twat. 

You're about ten miles off base on the native american thing, as well.


----------



## redsquirrel (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> You had mentioned that by the 50s, Hollywood westerns were displaying liberal sympathies toward the situation of aboriginal people.
> 
> I'm questioning that. One of the indicators that Hollywood wasn't yet taking a liberal approach to aboriginals, was the 'liberal' use of the word 'redskin'. They needn't have referred to them as 'aboriginals', but 'indian' might have sufficed.


What dreadful reasoning.
The fact that there was still significant racism towards Native Americans doesn't mean that by the 50s some aspects of that racism were being challenged and that there was more sympathy to the plight of Native Americans in western films from the 50s onwards.

Take_ Devil's Doorway_ for example, the fact that they had a white actor play the main NA lead is a fair point of criticism but it would be nonsense to say that the agenda of the film wasn't sympathetic to NAs.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Dude. It's transparently misogynist and reactionary. "Think twice before having an affair, because while there's obviously nothing wrong with it in principle, women are psycho bitches".


 
Who prescribed this homily to be inserted as a subtext in this Hollywood production: the Department of Education? Or do you think the executives at Paramount were more interested in getting good box office?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> What dreadful reasoning.
> The fact that there was still significant racism towards Native Americans doesn't mean that by the 50s some aspects of that racism were being challenged and that there was more sympathy to the plight of Native Americans in western films from the 50s onwards.
> 
> Take_ Devil's Doorway_ for example, the fact that they had a white actor play the main NA lead is a fair point of criticism but it would be nonsense to say that the agenda of the film wasn't sympathetic to NAs.


 
Others have taken a similar view.

http://bill-shiftingother.blogspot.ca/


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Who prescribed this homily to be inserted as a subtext in this Hollywood production: the Department of Education? Or do you think the executives at Paramount were more interested in getting good box office?



Jesus, is that how you think culture and ideology works?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Who prescribed this homily to be inserted as a subtext in this Hollywood production: the Department of Education? Or do you think the executives at Paramount were more interested in getting good box office?


I'm not sure why you say "inserted" - it's in the script. That's the point of the fable.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Jesus, is that how you think culture and ideology works?


 
If you're asking if I believe that Hollywood executives are first and foremost concerned about making money, then the answer is 'yes'.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> If you're asking if I believe that Hollywood executives are first and foremost concerned about making money, then the answer is 'yes'.



Yes so pimping films that sit with the current ideology is contradictary how?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Jul 31, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> I'm not sure why you say "inserted" - it's in the script. That's the point of the fable.


 
The point of the fable is to follow the standard three-act formulation of almost all films, the one that we are most comfortable with: setup/conflict/resolution.

The same format is dressed up in myriad forms, with myriad characters/situations constituting the purveyor of the conflict.


----------



## revol68 (Jul 31, 2012)

Yes and the point of Animal Farm is to have a beginning, middle and end made from sentences that are in themselves constructed from words...

Fuuuuu


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jul 31, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> The point of the fable is to follow the standard three-act formulation of almost all films, the one that we are most comfortable with: setup/conflict/resolution.
> 
> The same format is dressed up in myriad forms, with myriad characters/situations constituting the purveyor of the conflict.


Seriously. You're saying the content means nothing? That it's just there to fulfil some Campbell-type universal plot and there's nothing at all behind that?

Uh huh. No, but come on, I know you're better than that.


----------



## Reno (Jul 31, 2012)

That's where any discussion about film becomes pointless and uninteresting for me, when someone negates any meaning apart from the superficial mechanics of a plot.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Others have taken a similar view.
> 
> http://bill-shiftingother.blogspot.ca/


I'm not sure that blog really contradicts my point.

Taking one of the films he/she singles out, I'm not going to claim that the portrayal of NAs in _The Searchers_ is without problems, but to claim that it's _agenda_ wasn't sympathetic to NAs is just factually wrong. Ford made it _precisely because_ he felt that NAs hadn't been fairly represented in films.

EDIT: I also think that you should compare _The Searchers _and _The Unforgiven _to what came before them as well as what came after.


----------



## Sue (Aug 1, 2012)

Garek said:


> _The Breakfast Club_
> 
> They 'Barbify' the alternative girl.


 
Absolutely. And she looked so much better before too.


----------



## Sue (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I liked her red shoes.


 Ruby slippers, surely...?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

FridgeMagnet said:


> Seriously. You're saying the content means nothing? That it's just there to fulfil some Campbell-type universal plot and there's nothing at all behind that?
> 
> Uh huh. No, but come on, I know you're better than that.


 
I'm saying that Hollywood fare is extremely formulaic.

I also reject the notion that Fatal Attraction was made in order to uphold and promulgate American Family Values. The movie, like many others, will contain those values because the vast majority of the moviegoing public is relatively conservative, and a resolution that evidences those values, is a comfortable, easy one for the audience.

If the resolution is too disturbing for the average moviegoer, the film won't do very good box office.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> I'm not sure that blog really contradicts my point.
> 
> Taking one of the films he/she singles out, I'm not going to claim that the portrayal of NAs in _The Searchers_ is without problems, but to claim that it's _agenda_ wasn't sympathetic to NAs is just factually wrong. Ford made it _precisely because_ he felt that NAs hadn't been fairly represented in films.


 
My simple point is that the portrayal of aboriginal people changed circa 1970, in consonance with other societal changes that were happening around the same time. War movies changed around that same time as well - compare Where Eagles Dare [1968] with Kelly's Heroes[1970]


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> My simple point is that the portrayal of aboriginal people changed circa 1970, in consonance with other societal changes that were happening around the same time. War movies changed around that same time as well - compare Where Eagles Dare [1968] with Kelly's Heroes[1970]


Whether that's true or not it doesn't mean that there weren't changes before then.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> Whether that's true or not it doesn't mean that there weren't changes before then.


 

There may well have been the occasional film that presented a different viewpoint; but the big change, the one that saw aboriginals portrayed relatively consistently in a more positive or sympathetic manner, occurred circa 1970.

What you're saying is there are exceptions to every rule; that's true.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2012)

Ok if that's true you'll be able to give plenty of westerns films from the 50s/60s with a "shoddy agenda" regarding Native Americans.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> Ok if that's true you'll be able to give plenty of westerns films from the 50s/60s with a "shoddy agenda" regarding Native Americans.


 'Shoddy agenda'.

That's someone else's terminology that I haven't adopted.

Films prior to 1970 tended to portray aboriginals in a less-than-positive, or unfavourable manner.


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 1, 2012)

They don't mean anything by it though. They're just fables about good and evil.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 1, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> 'Shoddy agenda'..
> 
> That's someone else's terminology that I haven't adopted..


That's the title of the fucking thread, and what this whole debate has been about.



Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Films prior to 1970 tended to portray aboriginals in a less-than-positive, or unfavourable manner


 You bluffing idiot, you've been caught out again. Neither myself, nor anyone else AFAIK, have claimed otherwise. What's at issue is twosheds claim that "virtually any cowboy film" has a shoddy agenda wrt Native Americans.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> You bluffing idiot, you've been caught out again. Neither myself, nor anyone else AFAIK, have claimed otherwise. What's at issue is twosheds claim that "virtually any cowboy film" has a shoddy agenda wrt Native Americans.


 
Post 21, by Reno:



> A lot of famous Westerns don't even feature Native American characters or a conflict with them and by the 1950s Westerns featured sympathetic Native American characters and were more likely to have a liberal agenda which was critical of the treatment of Native Americans.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> Team America - World Police.
> Beneath the OTT gross out humour its shameless right wing libetariansim. Fearlessly rips into hollywood liberals. Completely ignores Bush and co.


 
Except that the main plot of the film was completely taking the piss out of US foreign policy and unilateralism

The reason that they didn't have Bush as a cowboy or something was that it was so obvious, there was a whole industry in making jokes about the fact that Bush came across as really stupid on TV, it was an old joke by the time the movie came out, people like Michael Moore and Matt Damon weren't the subject of any jokes at the time (if I remember right, on here a lot of people were saying what a genius Michael Moore was for his films....)


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Team America was in the final instance apologism for US hegemony, a necessary evil.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

Not sure if these are really subtexts or just bits in films that annoyed me a bit

In 'A Beautiful Mind' the fact that the guy was bisexual seemed to be tied in with the fact that he was mentally ill. He really was bisexual and mentally ill, but the way they put it in the film seemed a bit like 'yeah he had serious mental problems, at one point he was even sleeping with men!'. 
In 'Falling Down' the guy just turns out to be a total loon at the end. The whole point of that film was that he was just the most normal man in LA and then one day the amount of day to day shit that is part of living in a big city got to him (and on that day a big bag of guns pretty much fell into his lap ) but in the last bit we find out that he lived with his crazy mum cos his wife kicked him out for being scary. 

I think there is a good chance in both cases that it was as much to do with the limits of the format as anything else, neither of them were really expensive or ambitious films and those two bits were kind of peripheral to the plot


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Team America was in the final instance apologism for US hegemony, a necessary evil.


 

One of the running jokes of the film was that Team America destroyed everywhere they went and didn't have a clue what was going on

The great speech at the end of Team America



> We're dicks! We're reckless, arrogant, stupid dicks. And the Film Actors Guild are pussies. And Kim Jong Il is an asshole. Pussies don't like dicks, because pussies get fucked by dicks. But dicks also fuck assholes: assholes that just want to shit on everything. Pussies may think they can deal with assholes their way. But the only thing that can fuck an asshole is a dick, with some balls. The problem with dicks is: they fuck too much or fuck when it isn't appropriate - and it takes a pussy to show them that. But sometimes, pussies can be so full of shit that they become assholes themselves... because pussies are an inch and half away from ass holes. I don't know much about this crazy, crazy world, but I do know this: If you don't let us fuck this asshole, we're going to have our dicks and pussies all covered in shit!




I don't think you are meant to take it seriously....


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

No you really are, it sits with perfect with their right wing libertarian politics.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

> Team America was in the final instance apologism for US hegemony,


 
Matt Stone and Trey Parker, US hegemonic apologists. 





> MATT: Yeah, I forgot about that. He was going to cruise around. It was going to completely ignore the fact that he was the President or a guy from Texas — anything real about him — and just make him an action hero. That was funny.
> 
> TREY: At the time, we were doing “That’s My Bush!” And we just loved the cast and really loved the show. And it got put to us by Comedy Central: “Guys, we can’t afford to do ‘That’s My Bush!’ and ‘South Park,’ so you’ve gotta pick one.”
> 
> ...


 



> I have to ask you about the recent Drudge Report item, where an anonymous “White House official” charged that “Team America” was trivializing the war on Terror: Why does the White House respond to a teaser trailer for a movie starring puppets, but not to “Fahrenheit 9/11”?
> 
> MATT: Well, first of all, I think “Fahrenheit 9/11” was … well, it was a different kind of movie. I just wonder how real that “news” really was. That’s all I’m gonna say.
> 
> I mean, “an anonymous White House staffer”? Drudge said “a senior Bush administration official,” and when we got on the radio with him, it was “a junior staffer.” What is it — junior or senior? What are we talking about here? Who knows? It might have been the janitor.


 



> George Clooney, one of the “limousine liberals” being mocked in the movie, loves you guys — he even played a gay dog on an early episode.
> 
> TREY: Yeah. We’re, like, light friends with George. We’ve hung out with George. But the thing is, he was on that list, man — he was on that MoveOn.org. So we weren’t gonna be hypocritical and be, like, “Well, let’s not pick on George. He’s our friend.” We’re like, “Nope — f*** you, George. You went on the news shows, too, and talked about Iraq like you knew what was going on. We’re taking you down, buddy.”
> 
> ...


 
http://www.movieweb.com/news/trey-parker-and-matt-stone-talk-team-america-world-police


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

which you ascribe to them....


----------



## Garek (Aug 1, 2012)

N_igma said:


> She looks a lot nicer at the end of the film and there's nothing 'Barbie' like about her:


 
Smily girl in pink or surly girl in a parka?






I know which side my bread is buttered.


----------



## Kaka Tim (Aug 1, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> Except that the main plot of the film was completely taking the piss out of US foreign policy and unilateralism
> 
> The reason that they didn't have Bush as a cowboy or something was that it was so obvious, there was a whole industry in making jokes about the fact that Bush came across as really stupid on TV, it was an old joke by the time the movie came out, people like Michael Moore and Matt Damon weren't the subject of any jokes at the time (if I remember right, on here a lot of people were saying what a genius Michael Moore was for his films....)


 
The most efective and vicious humour was directed agasint the hollywood liberals. Fine. But they didn't target any establishment figures at all. And It ends up effectively saying -" gung ho twats are twats - but sometimes we need them".
Meanwhile the main villian is King Jong Ill - Not Saddam or OBL. So as a Satire about The War on Terror its defanged itself straight away. Rather than a hilarious, fearless outrageous pisstake (supposedlly the south park boys main schtick) - it shys away from attacking the powerful to rip the piss out of the far easier and safer targets of hollywood liberal nob heads.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> which you ascribe to them....


What you mean by watching them then thinking about them and the methods employed, the underlying implicit narratives vs the explicit plot - you know sort of analysing them? What else do you suggest we do? What sort of model of creativity do you work from - that the authors personal formal intentions are all that a work can express?


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

Kaka Tim said:


> The most efective and vicious humour was directed agasint the hollywood liberals. Fine. But they didn't target any establishment figures at all. And It ends up effectively saying -" gung ho twats are twats - but sometimes we need them".
> Meanwhile the main villian is King Jong Ill - Not Saddam or OBL. So as a Satire about The War on Terror its defanged itself straight away. Rather than a hilarious, fearless outrageous pisstake (supposedlly the south park boys main schtick) - it shys away from attacking the powerful to rip the piss out of the far easier and safer targets of hollywood liberal nob heads.


 
But the whole plot was about the US going around the world destroying countries while claiming to be a 'police force'. The Kim Jong Il thing was at the time of the 'Axis of Evil'. And I don't see why they would have 'shied away' from going after Bush-Cheney, that was the fashionable thing to do for movie makers at the time. 
And anyway, the fact that they attacked Liberals and not Conservatives doesn't mean that they are Conservative, that's like the Conservative argument that people who were against the war were supporters of Hussein!


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

butchersapron said:


> What you mean by watching them then thinking about them and the methods employed, the underlying implicit narratives vs the explicit plot - you know sort of analysing them? What else do you suggest we do? What sort of model of creativity do you work from - that the authors personal formal intentions are all that a work can express?


 
Are you sure that should be directed at me and not Revol?

From the 'explicit plot' yes the hero Gary makes a moving speech justifying the actions of Team America which defeats the Liberals and allows Team America to kill Kim Jong Il, but the 'underlying implicit intentions' seem to be that Team America are ridiculous and the destruction that they are reaping is misguided at best, through methods such as using a comically obscene and childish metaphor as their justification, by having the main characters sing funny songs at key moments, by using fucking puppets!

I said that you weren't meant to take the film literally but Revol claimed you are because they are right wing (he thinks, they never claimed this was their intention anyway)


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 1, 2012)

I'm not talking about that film. You made what appeared to me to be a reply to the thread title rather than another post. If it was part of an exchange with revol then ignore it.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Team America was really quite explicit in it's apologism for US hegemony, that people think the fact it takes the piss out of US gung ho posturing equates to real criticism only reinforces the lack of any serious critique of US foreign policy. Presenting them as bumbling morons lets them off the hook.

It's essentially an appeal for a more enlightened US hegemony.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Team America was really quite explicit in it's apologism for US hegemony, that people think the fact it takes the piss out of US gung ho posturing equates to real criticism only reinforces the lack of any serious critique of US foreign policy. Presenting them as bumbling morons lets them off the hook.
> 
> It's essentially an appeal for a more enlightened US hegemony.


 
Actually I think that the fact that Gary had to suck Spotswoode's wooden dick just before he made his speech to the F.A.G organisation represented a serious critique of US foreign policy. 
Spotswoode was straight but he forced Gary into performing a sex act on him with his mouth to prove his dedication to the cause of US military hegemony. Before that scene Gary had doubts about Team America's mission but then after that he used the same mouth to go and win the acting battle with Alec Baldwin. The 'hero' who manages to convince the world of the American mission has to suck the cock of an American military elite puppet to do so!
Also, when they throw Kim Jong Il onto that German WWI helmet he turns out to be an alien cockroach, aliens of course being one of the classic tropes of US cold war paranoia and an allusion to the idea that the Bush-Cheney regime's militarism (Team America) was more suited to a bygone era while the cockroach was clearly a reference to the fact that while the militaristic government in the US was concentrating on this idea of 'World Police' millions of Americans still lived in poverty where insects (as a symbol of poverty representative also of an inadequate health system and inadequate welfare/schooling etc)  were a much more real threat than foreign dictators

I mean, it's so obvious....


----------



## Garek (Aug 1, 2012)

_Schindller's List_

Zionist propaganda.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Garek said:


> _Schindller's List_
> 
> Zionist propaganda.


 
Never mind _Schindler's List _what about that whole Holocaust thing.

 joking


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

Soldier Blue: both sides were capable of hideous massacres. Don't think about context, war is just bad.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Oh fuck how did I forget _The Deerhunter _disgusting revisionist shit that somehow convinced people was brave and radical.

Like the _Hurt Locker_ but a hundred times more offensive.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

The eagle has landed : there were some good Nazis! they were only unmasked when saving a drowning child!. Never trust saffas though, they still have the hump over th Boer war. Isn't michael caine lovable and handsome?'


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

187: it's ok to mutilate gang affiliated teenagers just cos you got stabbed up


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> 187: it's ok to mutilate gang affiliated teenagers just cos you got stabbed up


 
You big fucking liberal wuss!


----------



## 8115 (Aug 1, 2012)

Fifty first dates - become vulnerable and you'll find true love.
Jarhead - join the army, be incredibly sexy and have a load of fun, also wars don't last very long and there's usually a big rave at the end.
Sucker punch - don't get me started.  Lets just say there's an excess of knee high socks
You've got mail - it's not really all that cool and sexy to be a successful businesswoman although it's just about ok if it's something ickle and cute like a children's bookstore, in the end though, really, leave everything to daddy capitalism and the big chains, they'll see you right, the time for mom and pop stores is over.
Bourne Identity - every penny spent on the CIA is a penny well spent.  Don't trust foreigners
Oceans eleven - gambling is gritty and glamorous


----------



## gosub (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> The eagle has landed : there were some good Nazis! they were only unmasked when saving a drowning child!. Never trust saffas though, they still have the hump over th Boer war. Isn't michael caine lovable and handsome?'


Never understood how Jack Higgins could rip off Went The Day Well and nobody mentions it


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

Braveheart & the war of indepedance one: I hate the english more than I hate the jews


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

8115 said:


> Sucker punch - don't get me started. Lets just say there's an excess of knee high socks


 
How could that be a bad thing, especially when used so hotly ironically to subvert female film tropes.

Also sailor outfits make everything else secondary.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

sister act one and two are acts of blatant papist propaganda


----------



## 8115 (Aug 1, 2012)

I don't think we need to revisit that film today.  Not in my weakened state, to quote Ferris Bueller


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> sister act one and two are acts of blatant papist propaganda


 
Communism is catholic, cunt.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

8115 said:


> I don't think we need to revisit that film today. Not in my weakened state, to quote Ferris Bueller


 
Ferris Bueller, now there's a piece of Reganite shite.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> Not sure if these are really subtexts or just bits in films that annoyed me a bit
> 
> In 'A Beautiful Mind' the fact that the guy was bisexual seemed to be tied in with the fact that he was mentally ill. He really was bisexual and mentally ill, but the way they put it in the film seemed a bit like 'yeah he had serious mental problems, at one point he was even sleeping with men!'.
> In 'Falling Down' the guy just turns out to be a total loon at the end. The whole point of that film was that he was just the most normal man in LA and then one day the amount of day to day shit that is part of living in a big city got to him (and on that day a big bag of guns pretty much fell into his lap ) but in the last bit we find out that he lived with his crazy mum cos his wife kicked him out for being scary.
> ...


 

falling down is a blatant cop-out. If you want to do a film about an ordinary man loosing the plot and going on the rampage then do one. make him a madman just fucked the whole piece.

trying to recall the name of the film where some fur trapper has his dog killed and goes of on an epic rampage....death hunt? set in snow scenes, 70s and very bloody


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> Irreversible is rabidly homophobic.


 
But the rape scene wasn't that bad.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> But the rape scene wasn't that bad.


 
Where did I imply that the rape scene "wasn't that bad" ? That's one of the reasons why the film is homophobic.

But maybe you want to speak up why you think depiction of a rape as being absolutely horrific is in itself ideologically unsound. Or do you think a film being rabidly homophobic is a lesser evil than depicting a rape, as you seem to be having a go at me ?


----------



## N_igma (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> She was cooler before, you square.


 
Who said anything about being cool?


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

N_igma said:


> Who said anything about being cool?


 
As my friend grandly proclaimed about why she couldn't go out with some guy

"Cool counts!"


----------



## N_igma (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> As my friend grandly proclaimed about why she couldn't go out with some guy
> 
> "Cool counts!"


 
She sounds like a dick. As a friend, I'd prefer an alternative girl to a millie no doubt about it. I was just expressing my opinion that the girl looked better after the "make over" in the Breakfast Club, how that makes me a square I don't know!


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> But maybe you want to speak up why you think depiction of a rape as being absolutely horrific is in itself ideologically unsound.


 
Because it's voyeuristic. I get that rape is horrific. What is gained from putting it under the microscope for nine minutes?


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

N_igma said:


> She sounds like a dick. As a friend, I'd prefer an alternative girl to a millie no doubt about it. I was just expressing my opinion that the girl looked better after the "make over" in the Breakfast Club, how that makes me a square I don't know!


 
Nah she was quite self deprecating when she said it, she's just very into fashion.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> Because it's voyeuristic. I get that rape is horrific. What is gained from putting it under the microscope for nine minutes?


 
Sure, it's an exploitation art house film, but isn't it better to depict a rape as being horrific rather than to gloss over it ?

But more importantly, why are you having a go at me for pointing out the film's homophobia and why are you saying that I'm implying that the rape "wasn't that bad", when I didn't mention any specifics about the film at all ? I'd really like an answer for that.


----------



## Citizen66 (Aug 1, 2012)

It was a joke.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

Citizen66 said:


> It was a joke.


 
Well, don't give up the day job !


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

talking of rape scenes in films, I believe the reason Straw Dogs had the rape scene censored was because the actress was portrayed as enjoying it- years since I saw that and I don't recall the scene. I remember it made me think Cornwall was best avoided


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> Well, don't give up the day job !


 
nah it was pretty funny.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Aug 1, 2012)

8ball said:


> As well as _Hero:_
> 
> _Gladiator_ - fascist propaganda
> _300_ - fascist propaganda
> I have my suspicions about _The Dark Knight Rises_, too...


 
I'd tend to agree about Dark Knight. I found myself leaving the theater and thinking the "villains" had a point.  Its all about how you should sacrifice freedom for security--always a bad idea.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

I hate people who say 300 was fascist propaganda, it's about the Spartans, you could hardly turn them into pinko commies.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> nah it was pretty funny.


 
Maybe you could explain the joke to me, ideally with visual aids and statistics.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I hate people who say 300 was fascist propaganda, it's about the Spartans, you could hardly turn them into pinko commies.


 

you could have portrayed their persian enemies in a light that did not concentrate on deformity, 'perversion' and swarthiness tho


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I hate people who say 300 was fascist propaganda, it's about the Spartans, you could hardly turn them into pinko commies.


 
The baddies are of people colour, disabled or effeminate, while out heroes are all caucasian musclemen. I'm sure Goebbels would have agreed with you though.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I hate people who say 300 was fascist propaganda, it's about the Spartans, you could hardly turn them into pinko commies.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> you could have portrayed their persian enemies in a light that did not concentrate on deformity, 'perversion' and swarthiness tho


 
The eastern hordes are the decadent multicultural heathens, the west, versus a small band of dedicated fighters, the taliban.

It's anti imperialist.

credit to Zizek, lol


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

anyway Millers always been dodgy, a candidate for serious questioning come the day


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> The eastern hordes are the decadent multicultural heathens, the west, versus a small band of dedicated fighters, the taliban.
> 
> It's anti imperialist.
> 
> credit to Zizek, lol


 

nice try


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

8ball said:


>


 
Fascism modeled it's self image on much of Spartan culture, should we be surprised that the Spartans appear a tad fash?


----------



## 8ball (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Fascism modeled it's self image on much of Spartan culture, should we be surprised that the Spartans appear a tad fash?


 
It's not a documentary.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> anyway Millers always been dodgy, a candidate for serious questioning come the day


 
I've always thought his stuff was too dumb to have any concious agenda, outside of being a fanboy wankfest. I'm sure you can see all kinds of theories in there, but fanboys just arn't that sophisticated. We're all lucky if they don't try to climb on top 12 year olds.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I've always thought his stuff was too dumb to have any concious agenda, outside of being a fanboy wankfest.


 
celebration of dumb reactionary violence is his agenda.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> I've always thought his stuff was too dumb to have any concious agenda, outside of being a fanboy wankfest. I'm sure you can see all kinds of theories in there, but fanboys just arn't that sophisticated. We're all lucky if they don't try to climb on top 12 year olds.


 
It doesn't help the film though that Zach Snyder directs like he was the love child of Michael Bay and Leni Riefenstahl.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> It doesn't help the film though that Zach Snyder directs like he was the love child of Michael Bay and Leni Riefenstahl.



Nothing wrong with that, well apart from Bay but Snyder cant be faulted for his visuals.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> I hate people who say 300 was fascist propaganda, it's about the Spartans, you could hardly turn them into pinko commies.


 
I'd like to see a film - perhaps scripted by the late Gore Vidal or some similar personage - which told the merry tale of how, when the Spartans were all off on their wars, the Helots, Sparta's majority slave population, had a high old time shagging the Spartans' wives.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> I'd like to see a film - perhaps scripted by the late Gore Vidal or some similar personage - which told the merry tale of how, when the Spartans were all off on their wars, the Helots, Sparta's majority slave population, had a high old time shagging the Spartans' wives.



That reminds me of a polish anarchist group who got themselves in a bit of sexism bother for putting up anti military posters informing those in the army that whilst they were away "WE ARE FUCKING YOUR WOMEN".


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> I'd like to see a film - perhaps scripted by the late Gore Vidal or some similar personage - which told the merry tale of how, when the Spartans were all off on their wars, the Helots, Sparta's majority slave population, had a high old time shagging the Spartans' wives.


 
Somebody had to. I read somewhere that on the marriage night, the bride was dressed in mens clothes to make the groom feel more comfortable.  That's probably an exaggeration, but they arn't known for being handy with the ladies.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Somebody had to. I read somewhere that on the marriage night, the bride was dressed in mens clothes to make the groom feel more comfortable.  That's probably an exaggeration, but they arn't known for being handy with the ladies.


That's rugby players.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> That reminds me of a polish anarchist group who got themselves in a bit of sexism bother for putting up anti military posters informing those in the army that whilst they were away "WE ARE FUCKING YOUR WOMEN".


 
That sounds like a story Butchersapron would post. It has that apronesque je ne sais quoi. . .


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 1, 2012)

The Lord of the Rings movies had the shoddy agenda of boring me to fucking death.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

well, that an the implicit love of fuedalist structures and dodgy racial politics


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Lord of the Rings movies had the shoddy agenda of boring me to fucking death.



And young englander paternal feudalism. Fuck Tolkein, he's responsible for 98% of the fantasy genre being tedious reactionary crap.


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> And young englander paternal feudalism. Fuck Tolkein, he's responsible for 98% of the fantasy genre being tedious reactionary crap.


 
Appeals to the sort of people who are far less fun than they think they are. Like geography students called Gemma and that.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

I love lotr, but then I grew up with fantasy books as the only alternative to christian literature- but fuck me Tolkein was a cunt. He spent his retirement playing elaborate versions of solitaire. Really.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> I love lotr, but then I grew up with fantasy books as the only alternative to christian literature- but fuck me Tolkein was a cunt. He spent his retirement playing elaborate versions of solitaire. Really.



The bibles a millions  times more interesting than Tolkein and his gimpy hobbit lackeys, old testament prophets coming down from the mountains fucking things up in ways that make the new batmans look pedestrian.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> Appeals to the sort of people who are far less fun than they think they are. Like geography students called Gemma and that.


 
Hey everybody! Let's all quote from MONTY PYTHON!


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> The bibles a millions times more interesting than Tolkein and his gimpy hobbit lackeys, old testament prophets coming down from the mountains fucking things up in ways that make the new batmans look pedestrian.


How wonderfully protestant.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> Hey everybody! Let's all quote from MONTY PYTHON!



Or worse still the hitchikers guide, then we can read some terry pratchett.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> How wonderfully protestant.



Anabaptist!


----------



## dylanredefined (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> I'd like to see a film - perhaps scripted by the late Gore Vidal or some similar personage - which told the merry tale of how, when the Spartans were all off on their wars, the Helots, Sparta's majority slave population, had a high old time shagging the Spartans' wives.


Only if they were into S&M I don't think consensual heterosexual sex was big on the Spartans agenda certainly not with slaves!
Their society was more fucked up than a lot
        If it wasn't for their glorious last stand they would be but a foot note in history
labelled crazy greek fuckwits.


----------



## Reno (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Nothing wrong with that, well apart from Bay but Snyder cant be faulted for his visuals.


 
I'm not a fan of his digitised Photoshop aesthetic. The pacing of his films and action scenes is at once frantic and monotonous, and when we don't get the ADHD editing style of his action scenes, his films are lurching from one "look at me" tableau to the next. I suppose this is all great if you've grown up on computer games and aren't attuned to the rhythm of decent film editing, but as I grew up on films I just don't get what's supposed to be so great about his "style".

BTW, what happened ? Yesterday I agreed with almost everything you said on this thread. Did the Canuck hack into your account ?


----------



## Jeff Robinson (Aug 1, 2012)

The Lion King. A defence of apartheid.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Or worse still the hitchikers guide, then we can read some terry pratchett.


 
When I was eight my speech therapist told me I reminded her of Marvin the android.

Beat that.


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 1, 2012)

dylanredefined said:


> Only if they were into S&M I don't think consensual heterosexual sex was big on the Spartans agenda certainly not with slaves!
> Their society was more fucked up than a lot
> If it wasn't for their glorious last stand they would be but a foot note in history
> labelled crazy greek fuckwits.


 
We should get Pier Paolo Pasolini in to direct, is that what you're saying?


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 1, 2012)

revol68 said:


> The bibles a millions times more interesting than Tolkein and his gimpy hobbit lackeys, old testament prophets coming down from the mountains fucking things up in ways that make the new batmans look pedestrian.


 

when you've had it fed to you morning and night sice infancy it sort of loses the magic. Still dip into Revelations every now and then tho and am part-time reading the tanakh


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

N_igma said:


> She sounds like a dick. As a friend, I'd prefer an alternative girl to a millie no doubt about it. I was just expressing my opinion that the girl looked better after the "make over" in the Breakfast Club, how that makes me a square I don't know!


 
The scruffy Ally Sheedy in the jacket is better.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> Sure, it's an exploitation art house film, but isn't it better to depict a rape as being horrific rather than to gloss over it ?.


 
Depends how it's done. The rape scene in Frenzy is very effective, and it doesn't last nine minutes.


----------



## rekil (Aug 1, 2012)

Enemy At The Gates. Especially this bit.



> I've been such a fool, Vassili. Man will always be a man. There is no new man. We tried so hard to create a society that was equal, where there'd be nothing to envy your neighbour. But there's always something to envy. A smile, a friendship, something you don't have and want to appropriate. In this world, even a Soviet one, there will always be rich and poor. Rich in gifts, poor in gifts. Rich in love, poor in love.


Not to mention all the lies about the actual battle.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Reno said:


> The baddies are of people colour, disabled or effeminate, while out heroes are all caucasian musclemen. I'm sure Goebbels would have agreed with you though.


 
But..... the Spartans actually, historically, fought the Persians Empire. And the Persian Empire included............... people of colour.

They should have got Mel Gibson and some Celts in there for political correctness sake.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Idris2002 said:


> I'd like to see a film - perhaps scripted by the late Gore Vidal or some similar personage - which told the merry tale of how, when the Spartans were all off on their wars, the Helots, Sparta's majority slave population, had a high old time shagging the Spartans' wives.


 
Vidal has, in fact, done a book about war.


----------



## Santino (Aug 1, 2012)

On second viewing, The Dark Knight Rises is actually a warning against both liberal paternalism (Bruce Wayne) and Trotskyite vanguardism (Bane). Instead we should heed Commissioner Gordon's words that the solution will 'come from inside the city', i.e. from grassroots working class activism.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Aug 1, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But..... the Spartans actually, historically, fought the Persians Empire. And the Persian Empire included............... people of colour.
> 
> They should have got Mel Gibson and some Celts in there for political correctness sake.


 
Mel Gibson and political correctness are an oxymoron.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Mel Gibson and political correctness are an oxymoron.


 
The problem for Mel, is people keep using hidden microphones on him, then we get to hear him yelling out some woman in a gravelly voice.

What he needs to do, is learn American Sign Language.


----------



## Yuwipi Woman (Aug 1, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> The problem for Mel, is people keep using hidden microphones on him, then we get to hear him yelling out some woman in a gravelly voice.
> 
> What he needs to do, is learn American Sign Language.


 
Or he could lay off the booze and the freaky religion.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 1, 2012)

copliker said:


> Enemy At The Gates. Especially this bit.


 
Yeah, that is shit. Bob Hoskins has played two Soviet figures. Nikita Khrushchev in that, and state security chief Lavrenty Beria in Andrei Konchalovsky's The Inner Circle.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Yuwipi Woman said:


> Or he could lay off the booze and the freaky religion.


 
I think there's a better chance of him learning ASL...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> Yeah, that is shit. Bob Hoskins has played two Soviet figures. Nikita Khrushchev in that, and state security chief Lavrenty Beria in Andrei Konchalovsky's The Inner Circle.


 
I think he made a good Khrushchev.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 1, 2012)

He didn't.

 'Staaaalllingrad!'  

He didn't pronounce Khrushchev properly, either.


----------



## Firky (Aug 1, 2012)

Jeff Robinson said:


> The Lion King. A defence of apartheid.


 
Never seen it but I want to now.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> He didn't.
> 
> 'Staaaalllingrad!'
> 
> He didn't pronounce Khrushchev properly, either.


 
My second choice of an actor would be Borat's wrestling partner.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 1, 2012)

That annoying Paul Giamatti is supposed to be playing him in a forthcoming US telly biopic. About his visit to the US in 1959, where he made friends with that corn farmer, Bob Garst.  Later on, apparently JFK was shit scared of him, and hated meetings with the loud-mouthed little bruiser.


----------



## Firky (Aug 1, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> Yeah, that is shit. Bob Hoskins has played two Soviet figures. Nikita Khrushchev in that, and state security chief Lavrenty Beria in Andrei Konchalovsky's The Inner Circle.


 

You seen Dogs, Do You Want to Live For Ever?


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 1, 2012)

Nyet, tovarisch.  Any good?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 1, 2012)

Captain Hurrah said:


> That annoying Paul Giamatti is supposed to be playing him in a forthcoming US telly biopic. About his visit to the US in 1959, where he made friends with that corn farmer, Bob Garst. Later on, apparently JFK was shit scared of him, and hated meetings with the loud-mouthed little bruiser.


 
Rather than Giamatti, I'd consider this actor:






Glenn Morshower


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 1, 2012)

Don't know who could do a good Khrushchev, to be honest. Has to be a short arse though.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Aug 2, 2012)

Could I add, all Frathouse movies


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 2, 2012)

not-bono-ever said:


> Could I add, all Frathouse movies


 Just out of interest: what's the secret agenda of Porky's Revenge?


----------



## The Octagon (Aug 2, 2012)

Porky's has ridiculously more male nudity than female, it's more a film for teenage boys to validate their own puberty than it is to leer at girls /psueds corner



I can't defend Kim Catrall's 'Lassie' though


----------



## badseed (Aug 2, 2012)

Has Rocky IV been mentioned yet?


----------



## Random (Aug 2, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> But..... the Spartans actually, historically, fought the Persians Empire. And the Persian Empire included............... people of colour.



There wasn't as much cultural difference between the two sides as the film pretends.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Aug 2, 2012)

badseed said:


> Has Rocky IV been mentioned yet?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 2, 2012)

Random said:


> There wasn't as much cultural difference between the two sides as the film pretends.


 
There were some differences, though.

Ruins/remnants of Sparta:







Ruins/remnants of Ctesiphon:


----------



## two sheds (Aug 3, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Jesus, what a retardedly patronising and one dimensional understanding of culture and how people relate to it.


 


revol68 said:


> Why are liberals always such smug patronising cunts?


 
My but you're a nasty humourless little piece of shit.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 3, 2012)

Must admit when watching 'Samurai Cop' I picked up a bit of a dodgy 'subtext'


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 3, 2012)

Random said:


> There wasn't as much cultural difference between the two sides as the film pretends.


 
First one is a photo, second one is a drawing. Total fail


----------



## Santino (Aug 3, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> First one is a photo, second one is a drawing. Total fail


A drawing of a photo though.


----------



## barney_pig (Aug 4, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Fascism modeled it's self image on much of Spartan culture, should we be surprised that the Spartans appear a tad fash?


As did the communists


----------



## Idris2002 (Aug 4, 2012)

barney_pig said:


> As did the communists


 
Really? When was this?

(And I thought it was more ancient Rome that Benito and Co. were trying to revive - hence the saluting arm held at 45 degrees and so on. I'm sure that years ago I saw a pic of Italian fash doing this while dressed in togas).


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 4, 2012)

Fascist and Soviet art aren't a million miles apart, you can see a lot of the 20 stuff like futurism/minimalism in both of them. 

Real artists aren't stupid enough to ignore positive stuff if they don't like it 

It isn't about supporting a team


----------



## Cloo (Aug 4, 2012)

Anything mentioned in Reel Bad Arabs


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 4, 2012)

That reminds me, True Lies is well shoddy and not just on a racial basis.


----------



## billy_bob (Aug 6, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> The problem for Mel, is people keep using hidden microphones on him, then we get to hear him yelling out some woman in a gravelly voice.
> 
> What he needs to do, is learn American Sign Language.


 
Well, given that learning not to be an utter fucking nob seems to be beyond him, maybe.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 6, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> That reminds me, True Lies is well shoddy and not just on a racial basis.


 
Ilike the bit where Arnie makes the fake spy piss himself-almost as good as where he makes Jamie Lee Curtis do a dance in a not-at-all-dodgy way


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Jesus, what a retardedly patronising and one dimensional understanding of culture and how people relate to it.


 
You want to explain this by the way?


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry that was the agenda behind which western? Anyway your claim wasn't that there was some western that have a shoddy agenda but that virtually all of them do.
> 
> And for examples of westerns which attempted (however flawed) to try and give a sympathetic portrayal to Native Americans
> _Dances With Wolves_
> ...


 



_The Searchers _
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Searchers_(film)



> Shortly after Ethan's arrival, cattle belonging to his neighbor Lars Jorgensen (John Qualen) are stolen, and when Captain Samuel Clayton (Ward Bond) leads Ethan and a group of Rangers to follow the trail, they discover that the theft was a ploy by Comanche to draw the men away from their families. When they return home, they find the Edwards homestead in flames; Aaron, his wife Martha (Dorothy Jordan), and their son Ben (Robert Lyden) dead; and Debbie and her older sister Lucy (Pippa Scott) abducted.


 


Dakota Incident
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0049118/



> A number of people are waiting for the stage to Laramie. Some are anxious to get there and are willing to bribe the stationmaster for tickets on the sold-out run. When the stage arrives bristling with Cheyenne arrows in it (as well as in the passengers), space becomes available and some brave souls set out on the coach. Attacked by Indians, the horses run off, the coach is burned and the survivors take refuge in a dry gully. One by one the Indians and the passengers pick each other off, until thirst and exhaustion take their toll on the three people ...


 

_T_hese two give a 'sympathetic portrayal'? Indians murdering innocent Americans including women and children? 

What the Americans did was genocide remember.



> Thus, according to Ward Churchill, a professor of ethnic studies at the University of Colorado, the reduction of the North American Indian population from an estimated 12 million in 1500 to barely 237,000 in 1900 represents a"vast genocide . . . , the most sustained on record." By the end of the 19th century, writes David E. Stannard, a historian at the University of Hawaii, native Americans had undergone the"worst human holocaust the world had ever witnessed, roaring across two continents non-stop for four centuries and consuming the lives of countless tens of millions of people." In the judgment of Lenore A. Stiffarm and Phil Lane, Jr.,"there can be no more monumental example of sustained genocide—certainly none involving a 'race' of people as broad and complex as this—anywhere in the annals of human history."


http://hnn.us/articles/7302.html

That is the historically accurate version of what happened - cowboy films that reflect that, please?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

two sheds said:


> _The Searchers _
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Searchers_(film)
> 
> 
> ...


 
Little Big Man.

Soldier Blue.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2012)

Reno said:


> We were talking about western *films*, so why are you showing me a link that is all about TV westerns ? TV was a far more conservative medium than film was from the 50s to 70s culturally lagging behind what was going on in films, so it has little to do with what I was talking about. I was talking about the revisionist, more liberal western films from the mid-50s onwards.


 
Well not *all* of the films referred to in that post were tv films, and if we're being anally retentive about it I'll refer to them as 'films for tv'.




Reno said:


> Why should a historical film refer to Native American's in terms that appease modern, politically correct sensibilities when people at the time didn't. Should a historical film about slavery have to refer to black people as "people of colour" when white people called them something very different ?
> 
> And many Westerns don't even feature Native Americans or a conflict with them, so not every Westerns refers to 'redskins"


 
Yes, because they'd fucking killed them all or consigned them to reservations. 

And since you've been a bit fucking patronising, I think I can ask whether you'd be happy with German films that referred to Jews as 'kykes' - that'd just be 'political correctness' would it?

It's not just how they're referred to - it's the fact that they're airbrushed out of the history.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Well not *all* of the films referred to in that post were tv films, and if we're being anally retentive about it I'll refer to them as 'films for tv'.


 
Westerns from 50-70 reflected the traditional American viewpoint prevalent at the time: Indians bad, Cowboys good.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2012)

And cowboy films where it wasn't understood that people go round with six shooters and take the law into their own hands when somebody kills one of their nearest and dearest? Not a shoddy agenda if you're a rootn tootn member of the NRA admittedly.

Baddy kills cowboy's child. Cowboy goes to the law and leaves it in their hands to give a fair trial where the baddies are imprisoned. End of story - not going to make a very good cowboy film is it?

[/patronising git]


----------



## two sheds (Aug 7, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> Little Big Man.
> 
> Soldier Blue.


 
Yes - plus the others that have been mentioned. Sort of proves the point, though, doesn't it.

I made the original post half in jest, but we've had six or seven mentioned by name so far that give a 'sympathetic view' of Native Americans, two of which featured Indians as cold blooded killers in them. Looking at Wiki entries for westerns of the 30s, 40s and 50s there are fucking hundreds of them in there.


----------



## killer b (Aug 7, 2012)

Bee movie had a proper dodgy anti working class message to it. Kind of 'yeah so capitalism is a bit shit, but don't mess with the natural order of things or it'll get much worse'


----------



## Athos (Aug 7, 2012)

I'm taking the kids to see The Lorax today. On the face of it, an environmental morality tale for kids. Will keep my eyes peeled for any dodgy subtext, though.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Yes - plus the others that have been mentioned. Sort of proves the point, though, doesn't it.
> 
> I made the original post half in jest, but we've had six or seven mentioned by name so far that give a 'sympathetic view' of Native Americans, two of which featured Indians as cold blooded killers in them. Looking at Wiki entries for westerns of the 30s, 40s and 50s there are fucking hundreds of them in there.


 
I think it's part of a societal process, a growing up, or a gaining of knowlege, or a change in attitude, most likely. As I've said before, at least in the US, the process of questioning the Vietnam War; the process of considering the basis of the Civil Rights movement, of women's rights, caused a more generalized questioning of long-accepted societal attitudes and beliefs. Hence, an awakening and a questioning when it came to US history vis a vis aboriginal peoples.


----------



## Reno (Aug 7, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Well not *all* of the films referred to in that post were tv films, and if we're being anally retentive about it I'll refer to them as 'films for tv'.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
A German film wouldn't refer to Jews as 'kykes' because that word doesn't exist in German.  The representation of Jews in German films is not comparable to those of Native American's in Westerns. For circumstances that should be obvious, there wasn't that gradual shift in representation I'm talking about and why that is so should be quite obvious. At least try and come up with an comparison that works.

As to the rest, I've answered all of that in my previous post. A better comparison would be that a US film of the 50s would have referred to black people as negroes, or a word not in use now, but I wouldn't expect anybody then to use "people of colour" and a Western would have used the word Indian while a racist character would have said something like 'red skins'.

And as you keep accusing me of being patronising, have a good look at yourself, you are being patronising and repetitive, sidestepping everything you don't like to answer. And that endless article you quoted apart from being mainly about TV, dealt with some pre-50s films which we have all agreed on often being dodgy. But I said all of that before, so how often do I have to repeat myself ?

As to this constant assertion that all films pre-70s showed Native American characters in a negative light, check out *Broken Arrow, Run of the Arrow *or* Taza Son of the Cochise.* Even a film like The Searchers, which features a racist lead character acknowledges that the character is wrong and it turns out to be far more complex by the end. In the 50s you didn't get a representation of Native American's as simplistic as Stagecoach anymore.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

Reno said:


> In the 50s you generally didn't get a representation of Native American's as simplistic as Stagecoach anymore.


 
Yes, there were a very few. But you fall into error with the use of the term 'generally'.

Generally, most westerns 50 - 70 presented the standard line of 'Indians are Bad'.


----------



## Reno (Aug 7, 2012)

Thanks, I'm done with that topic because I have more important things to get on with rather than being made to repeat myself.

Please check out the 1950s films I quoted which represent Native Americans as positive, even heroic characters instead of repeating the same thing over and over. They may have been naive, but representations of race in Hollywood films was changing in the 50s, be that Native Americans, African Americans or Jews and it was far more complex then the two of you like to make out.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

Reno said:


> Please check out the 1950s films I quoted which represent Native Americans as positive, even heroic characters instead of repeating the same thing over and over. Representation of race in Hollywood films was changing in the 50s and is more complex then the two of you like to make out.


 
The change came circa 1970.

I live here, went to movies every week, beginning in the early 60s. I accept that you have an interest in film, but from what you say, you grew up in Germany, then moved to UK [or something like that]. I would never presume to think that I have a greater knowledge of German or even British films than you have. I'm confident that I've seen many more american-made Westerns than you have. I've seen many of them made since 1945, either at the theatre, or on tv.

edited to add: I just looked at the list. There were a huge number made between 1945 - 55; I've seen some of those. 55 - 60, more. 60 - 80, most.


----------



## Reno (Aug 7, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> The change came circa 1970.
> 
> I live here, went to movies every week, beginning in the early 60s. I accept that you have an interest in film, but from what you say, you grew up in Germany, then moved to UK [or something like that]. I would never presume to think that I have a greater knowledge of German or even British films than you have. I'm confident that I've seen many more american-made Westerns than you have. I've seen many of them made since 1945, either at the theatre, or on tv.


 
So you are confident, are you ? You are making a lot of assumptions there about me or what we got to see on the telly or in theatres in Germany and they are wrong.Your previous assertion that it all changed with a single film (Little Big Man) won't wash with anybody who knows their film history.

Who is a pompous twat now ?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 7, 2012)

Reno said:


> So you are confident, are you ? You are making a lot of assumptions there about me or what we got to see on the telly or in theatres in Germany and they are wrong.Your previous assertion that it all changed with a single film (Little Big Man) won't wash with anybody who knows their film history.
> 
> Who is a pompous twat now ?


 
You. 

You've stated earlier that the western isn't one of your favored genres. As for what you get on the telly in Germany, I'm guessing that some percentage of it, is made up of German productions. For awhile there, ie in the Fifties, Sixties etc, there wasn't much of a Canadian film output to speak of. What we got here in Canada, was American tv programs and films. It sort of stands to reason that US/Canadian tv and movie houses would have more US films  than German tv would, especially back in the 50s - 70s.


----------



## Reno (Aug 7, 2012)

I grew up in Germany in the 60s and 70s and Hollywood films made up 50% of prime time viewing then. Westerns may not be my favourite genre now, but they were my dads, so we watched lots of them when I was a kid. And as you claim to have seen so many more Westerns than me, even though you know fuck all about me and are merely going on assumtions because I'm German, why do you keep insisting that there were no positive representations of Native Americans when I keep mentioning films which did have them ? Did you see them or not ? Because you are just taking pot shots at me based on your own prejudices, while ignoring specific points I'm making.


----------



## redsquirrel (Aug 7, 2012)

two sheds said:


> _The Searchers _
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Searchers_(film)
> 
> Dakota Incident
> ...


Reno dealt with _The Searchers_, and in _Dakota Incident_ the end result is that both sides realise the folly of their actions.

As I said in the post you quoted the portrayals in these films are often deeply flawed, crude or patronising. But the _agenda_ of the films is attempting to be sympathetic to Native Americans, at least in the context of the times they were made.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 8, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Jesus, what a retardedly patronising and one dimensional understanding of culture and how people relate to it.


 


revol68 said:


> Why are liberals always such smug patronising cunts?


 
'Retardedly' is an ideologically pure word to use then is it you piece of shit? How about calling me retarded or a retard - why not add spazzer or spastic or cripple or crip or cretin? Add that I lick windows if you like.

You abuse people for saying less than that, you hypocritical cunt.


----------



## revol68 (Aug 8, 2012)

two sheds said:


> 'Retardedly' is an ideologically pure word to use then is it you piece of shit? How about calling me retarded or a retard - why not add spazzer or spastic or cripple or crip or cretin?
> 
> You abuse people for saying less than that, you hypocritical cunt.


 
awwwh, you really are quite upset about me slagging of your little a level media studies coursework.

and retarded means stunted, which is what the analysis you posted was, it was one dimensional crap that treats culture and peoples relationship to it as a one way street, that see's ideology as a simple matter of top down indoctrination of false consciousness, something you allude to yourself with your notion of ideologically purity.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 8, 2012)

Reno said:


> , why do you keep insisting that there were no positive representations of Native Americans


 
But... *I haven't said that*. I've acknowledged your examples, but to repeat: they were the exception, not the rule. The general change that occurred in the portrayal of NA aboriginal people from the Bad Guy, to various other things: from victim, to hero, to generally sympathetic character, got underway in a big way, in approx 1970.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 8, 2012)

I’ll trade insults and facepalms in a bit Reno but first can we continue the discussion? To keep it clear which of the following are you disagreeing with?

1) What *actually happened* was that the whites systematically made and broke treaties with the native Americans, stealing their land and forcing them further and further back onto reservations, while often also murdering them wholesale.

2) What happened to the Native Americans over the 400 years since the Europeans had landed could be fairly called a holocaust? (“Destruction or slaughter on a mass scale, esp. caused by fire or nuclear war: a nuclear holocaust").

3) Virtually no cowboy films admit to the theft and slaughter *on that scale* (I can think of one - anyone know of more?). Westerns can be as fucking liberal and sympathetic to the redskins as you like, but none of the ones I’ve seen talk about the continued persecution, theft of land and slaughter that was going on during the time of the stories cowboy films purportedly tell. And even when there isn’t a redskin in sight in the cowboy film, that’s because they’ve been herded off (shall we call it concentrated) into reservations (shall we call them camps) or killed.

4) That is arguably holocaust denial. Are you really saying that holocaust denial is not a ‘shoddy agenda’?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 8, 2012)

Reno said:


> I grew up in Germany in the 60s and 70s and Hollywood films made up 50% of prime time viewing then.


 
In the 60s-70s, US tv made up about 90% of Canadian tv viewing. It was so alarming to the govt and culture organizations, that Canadian Content rules were brought in: but even then, the rules mandated only something like 30% Canadian content.

At the same time, the US Westerns that were made, were running as first-run films in the movie houses.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 8, 2012)

two sheds said:


> I’ll trade insults and facepalms in a bit Reno but first can we continue the discussion? To keep it clear which of the following are you disagreeing with?
> 
> 1) What *actually happened* was that the whites systematically made and broke treaties with the native Americans, stealing their land and forcing them further and further back onto reservations, while often also murdering them wholesale.
> 
> ...


 
I agree with what you say. Where I disagree is in the motivation. Imo native americans were presented as The Bad Guy, because that's how society continued to perceive them. If the studios wanted to make money, they had to give the people what they wanted or expected. I don't believe it was part of a plan to 'keep the Red Man down', or something like that.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 8, 2012)

revol68 said:


> awwwh, you really are quite upset about me slagging of your little a level media studies coursework.
> 
> and retarded means stunted, which is what the analysis you posted was, it was one dimensional crap that treats culture and peoples relationship to it as a one way street, that see's ideology as a simple matter of top down indoctrination of false consciousness, something you allude to yourself with your notion of ideologically purity.


 
What a mealy mouthed pile of patronising one-dimensional shit. What did I actually say that was so offensive? There were three references I made in that post - one to the quote, one to Blazing Saddles and one to the film I'd seen. What makes me such a retard?

And retardly refers to someone being or acting like a retard. Like spastically would refer to someone acting like a spastic. Fucking coward that you can't admit it.

I refer to ideological purity because that's what you demand on on here in your standardly abusive manner. OK to call people retards though. Piece of shit.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 8, 2012)

Johnny Canuck3 said:


> I agree with what you say. Where I disagree is in the motivation. Imo native americans were presented as The Bad Guy, because that's how society continued to perceive them. If the studios wanted to make money, they had to give the people what they wanted or expected. I don't believe it was part of a plan to 'keep the Red Man down', or something like that.


 
Yes, I can't argue with that. The alternative would have been to make westerns that nobody went to see, or not to make westerns at all.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 8, 2012)

Something else: to my knowledge, apart from documentaries, there are no hollywood films that accurately portray the reality of current Native American life, or that life as it unfolded from say, 1920 - 1960. I don't know if many people would pay to see something that depressing.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Aug 8, 2012)

I was listening to a radio program on the way home. It was about Residential Schools. It was survivors talking about their experiences. I just naturally assumed it was aboriginal people talking.

But then they mentioned how they were forbidden from speaking Russian. It wasn't aboriginals: it was   Doukhobors. The govt apparently took their kids away too, at age 8. The people were saying how they hid in haystacks, under beds etc, when the line of cop cars would come up the drive. But the cops would find them.

I never knew about that. Another dark bit of my country's past.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 8, 2012)

revol68 said:


> awwwh, you really are quite upset about me slagging of your little a level media studies coursework.


 
What a patronising piece of shit you are. You were a real bully at school weren't you - you've got all the slimy tactics. No I'm not at all upset about people disagreeing, as you can see from my other posts. I'm happy to discuss things. People throw insults I'll respond in kind.

It's when they act like nasty abusive pieces of shit which is how you react to anyone who isn't 'ideologically pure' enough for you. Shows how 'retardedly' unaware you are that you do it. I'm a liberal cunt remember - I don't demand that everyone believes the same as me.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 9, 2012)

Sorry that I keep banging on about this, people, but I don’t react well to bullying. You come into the film forum for a bit of lighthearted discussion and you get some Right-On little piece of shit calling you a retard and a liberal cunt because of your opinion on … cowboy films (and Reno, fuck you for agreeing with that by the way  ).

Since nobody has come up with a cowboy film that gives the full horror of what cowboys helped to do to the native Americans, I’m modifying my original post to: ‘*all* cowboy films have a really shoddy agenda’. Any objections anyone? And now with JC – indisputably one of urban’s most respected and impartial Senior Members – basically agreeing, I’m going to add a point (5) to my previous post.

5) Anyone consistently quoting/agreeing with people who have a ‘dodgy agenda’ for long enough themselves become suspect. This is an agreed part of ‘Urban Rules’ from Jazzz threads (passim), recently confirmed as I recall in the mumps vaccine thread. So I’m labeling anyone disagreeing with me about cowboy films as a holocaust denier.  



revol68 said:


> retarded means stunted, which is what the analysis you posted was, it was one dimensional crap that treats culture and peoples relationship to it as a one way street, that see's ideology as a simple matter of top down indoctrination of false consciousness, something you allude to yourself with your notion of ideologically purity.


 
You un-aware little cunt, you accuse me of “little a level media studies coursework” and then you write that crap. “Top down indoctrination of false consciousness” – got a degree in top down indoctrination of false consciousness have you? What a cretinously (you don’t mind me using that word do you it clearly has nothing to do with the word ‘cretin’ and so obviously ok for general use) little retard you are (that’s ok too, just means stunted does it? Licked any windows recently? That’s presumably an ok insult too because lots of people lick windows).

You still can’t criticize my posts in any sort of English that makes any sense then, cunt?

You really don't have any self awareness do you? I referred to ideological purity because that’s what you demand from people and if anybody who falls short you repeatedly launch into your ‘liberal cunt’ abuse. Search ‘revol68’ and ‘cunt’ on urban and you get near 40 pages of him calling people cunts.



revol68 said:


> please keep those for your encrypted newsgroups.
> 
> you fat ugly cunt.


 


revol68 said:


> lol you fucking silly cunt!
> 
> go away and think what a retarded cunt you are.


 


revol68 said:


> You are a real clueless cunt, you're fixation on consumption and it's ethics marks you out as a liberal.
> 
> I mean really having a whinge about Nike trainers, that's a middle class hobby horse and a half, and far more betraying of a middle class mindset.


 
You spit out your abuse of people in the anonymous on-line safety. Do you abuse people like that in everyday life? I hope you don’t have charge of children or vulnerable adults in your everyday life you holocaust denying hypocritical piece of shit.

Did I call you a cunt already? Cunt.

[/revol68retardmode]


----------



## Orang Utan (Aug 9, 2012)

Have you seen Bury My Heart At Wounded Knee, two sheds?


----------



## two sheds (Aug 9, 2012)

bastard


----------



## Reno (Aug 9, 2012)

two sheds said:


> Since nobody has come up with a cowboy film that gives the full horror of what cowboys helped to do to the native Americans, I’m modifying my original post to: ‘*all* cowboy films have a really shoddy agenda’. Any objections anyone?
> [/revol68retardmode]


 

Actually even your hero JC mentioned Soldier Blue and Little Big Man, but again you didn't pay attention, you silly twat. You ignore anything that comtradicts your blinkered agenda, even when it comes from your little chums.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soldier_Blue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Big_Man_(film)



.....and fuck you too !


----------



## Reno (Aug 9, 2012)

two sheds said:


> And now with JC – indisputably one of urban’s most respected and impartial Senior Members – basically agreeing,


----------



## revol68 (Aug 9, 2012)

Two sheds breakdown over westerns is hilarious.


----------



## two sheds (Aug 9, 2012)

revol68 said:


> Two sheds breakdown over westerns is hilarious.


 
Yes, I was forgetting - there's nothing abusers enjoy more than someone having a breakdown.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 12, 2012)

Must admit the way that Native Americans are represented in American films in general.... let's just say I have some reservations


----------



## Reno (Aug 12, 2012)

biggus dickus said:


> Must admit the way that Native Americans are represented in American films in general.... let's just say I have some reservations


 
Thanks for that valuable input. We all do.


----------



## emanymton (Aug 12, 2012)

I think you missed the joke there.


----------



## Reno (Aug 12, 2012)

Oh, yes, puns again ! 

Germans are not good with puns.


----------



## 8ball (Aug 12, 2012)

Reno said:


> Germans are not good with puns.


 
The tagline pun is good, though.


----------



## butchersapron (Aug 14, 2012)

Star Wars by George Lukacs.


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 14, 2012)

Idiocracy or whatever it was called


----------



## Reno (Aug 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> Idiocracy or whatever it was called


 

It's a satire of shoddiness, why do you think it's agenda is shoddy ?


----------



## frogwoman (Aug 14, 2012)

Reno said:


> It's a satire of shoddiness, why do you think it's agenda is shoddy ?


 
because of the whole idea of "the stupid people have bred and made the world stupid"


----------



## Reno (Aug 14, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> because of the whole idea of "the stupid people have bred and made the world stupid"


 
I think it's premise was more that humanity has devolved and that everybody has gotten stupid. It's a satire on where US popular culture and politics are going and that's what has made people stupid. Not that "the stupid" have overtaken the rest by breeding more.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 14, 2012)

I think all of the Mike Judge films have good agendas but terrible production

Idiocracy and Office Space both really captured what is wrong with work for most people, but the solutions were terrible, it's basically Kevin Smith only not quite as stupid

I fucking love King of the Hill though,


----------



## Reno (Aug 14, 2012)

That's true. There were many great ideas and jokes in Idiocracy, but it never quite worked as a film. I can't even remember anything about Office Space now.


----------



## biggus dickus (Aug 14, 2012)

Reno said:


> That's true. There were many great ideas and jokes in Idiocracy, but it never quite worked as a film. I can't even remember anything about Office Space now.


 
It was the same, that line. I think the jokes were better, 'It's not that I'm lazy, I just don't care' sums everything up lol

But the end of the film is some daft heist so the hero can marry Jennifer Aniston, what??


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 14, 2012)

Reno said:


> I think it's premise was more that humanity has devolved and that everybody has gotten stupid. It's a satire on where US popular culture and politics are going and that's what has made people stupid. Not that "the stupid" have overtaken the rest by breeding more.


 


so how do you explain that bit at the start where the suburban middle class couple don't ever get around to having a kid whereas the redneck breeds like a rabit? It gets away with it cos the rest of the film is funny as fuck but its still a bit off.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> Sorry that was the agenda behind which western? Anyway your claim wasn't that there was some western that have a shoddy agenda but that virtually all of them do.
> 
> And for examples of westerns which attempted (however flawed) to try and give a sympathetic portrayal to Native Americans
> _Dances With Wolves_
> ...


 
_soldier blue_ dealt with the thing pretty straight up as outright genocide.


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2012)

youngian said:


> Early 70s Carry On-
> 
> Carry on Girls- Killjoy feminists sabotage seaside beauty contest staged by bent councillor Sidney Fiddler
> .


 
I once thought I was watching a remake of this back in the 90s . It turned out it was actually the news , and Clare Short accompanied by a phalanx of stereotypical dungaree clad , severe haircut ladies were shoplifting armfuls of wankmags out of WH Smith.


----------



## DotCommunist (Aug 14, 2012)

Casually Red said:


> _soldier blue_ dealt with the thing pretty straight up as outright genocide.


 

they also show the indians massacring us soldiers. I tookit more as 'war is bad mkay?' rather than honest portrayal of the one sided nature of the invasion


----------



## Casually Red (Aug 14, 2012)

DotCommunist said:


> they also show the indians massacring us soldiers. I tookit more as 'war is bad mkay?' rather than honest portrayal of the one sided nature of the invasion


 
Id disagree with that and it certainly wasnt the message I took from it . The message of the film isnt revealed until the end . It deliberately sets out to portray the indians , gun smugglers etc as baddies in the traditional western fashion and formula . Only at the end are you shown why the Indians were practising tactics of annihilation and its all turned around .A war of annihilation was being waged against them as a race regardless of age or gender . So wiping out the soldiers was perfectly justified when the truth of what was happening the indians was revealed to the viewer.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 6, 2012)

the reader -a really well made film but politically very dodgy indeed in my view lol

heading south (dunno if i mentioned it already, but gary glitter would be proud)

meet the fockers, not made with a dodgy agenda but just ended up bein really offensive (in my view anyway)

think i've ranted on about the latter two films enough times in the past, there was also something a bit dodge aboutconstantine as well if I remember rightly.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Oct 6, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> there was also something a bit dodge aboutconstantine as well if I remember rightly.


As well as it being shit?


----------



## DotCommunist (Oct 7, 2012)

pissing on the memory of the source material Hellblazer was dodgy as fuck.

And Keanue Reeves


----------



## redsquirrel (Oct 7, 2012)

frogwoman said:


> the reader -a really well made film but politically very dodgy indeed in my view lol


Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian slammed it.

I know the book got a lot of criticism from historians, including IIRC Hans Mommsen.


----------



## frogwoman (Oct 7, 2012)

redsquirrel said:


> Peter Bradshaw in the Guardian slammed it.
> 
> I know the book got a lot of criticism from historians, including IIRC Hans Mommsen.


 
yeah because it was shite. well made shite but thinking about it nasty as fuck especially the bit with the daughter of one of the victims. movies like downfall etc have tackled this subject a lot more effectively


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2012)

What was dodgy about The Reader? Can't remember much about it apart from naked Kate Winslet


----------



## Orang Utan (Oct 7, 2012)

After last week's revelations about badly behaved radio DJs, I was reminded of the scene in Richard Curtis' The Boat That Rocked in which a young girl is almost tricked into sleeping with another man by her older boyfriend. It only came out a few years ago and it was just played as a farce, a bit naughty, wink wink boys will be boys


----------



## Reno (Oct 7, 2012)

I don't think The Reader has a shoddy agenda as such, the problem is that it's simply too bland a film to do the themes it attempts to tackle justice. Like everything Stephen Daldry does its self-important, cynically engineered awards bait which affects a high moral tone, but doesn't trust an audiences intelligence enough and clumsily spells everything out.


----------



## billy_bob (Oct 7, 2012)

Orang Utan said:


> After last week's revelations about badly behaved radio DJs, I was reminded of the scene in Richard Curtis' The Boat That Rocked in which a young girl is almost tricked into sleeping with another man by her older boyfriend. It only came out a few years ago and it was just played as a farce, a bit naughty, wink wink boys will be boys


 
See also my post about Love Actually (#90).  It may have looked petty, having a go at Curtis, in comparison to some of the more egregious examples of shoddy agendas on this thread, but I think there are some quite ugly attitudes lurking behind much of his supposedly feel-good froth.  You're right the current news coverage of Savile does rather highlight this particular one.  I recall Richard Herring interviewing Nick Frost on one of his podcasts a while ago and challenging him over the tone of that scene.


----------



## Minnie_the_Minx (Jan 20, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> sister act one and two are acts of blatant papist propaganda


 
It's on TV now.  I'm watching it for the 100th time.  I love it 

Sister Act 2 was crap though


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2013)

Lauren Hill tho :0


----------



## 8den (Jan 20, 2013)

Idris2002 said:


> When I was eight my speech therapist told me I reminded her of Marvin the android.
> 
> Beat that.


 
I'm now going to read all your posts in that voice.


----------



## jelavicroad (Jan 20, 2013)

Rambo 3 helping the heroic mujhadeen freedom fighters fighting the nasty russians ironic that the americans are now the occupying force against the same people


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

Would 'Revenge, while often involving uncomfortable moral compromises, is ultimately worth it for the lulz' be a shoddy agenda?



Spoiler



_Django Unchained_, I'm looking at you here...


----------



## Miss Caphat (Jan 20, 2013)

Wedding Crashers.  definitely shoddy.


----------



## mao (Jan 20, 2013)

*Third World Cop (1999) *
Loose cannon cop Capone returns to his home town of Kingston to join a group of officers fighting organised crime in the area. On his first day he uncovers gun smuggling operation that may be connected with lead criminal Oney. However his old crew, led by Ratty, also are involved leading Capone to a choice between his job and his old crew. _Written by bob the moo_


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

Birth of a Nation
Triumph of the Will
Basic Instinct
Boat Trip
Man Bites Dog
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
Gremlins
Dangerous Minds
American Pie


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> Gremlins


 
Is it that Phoebe Cates finds out that Santa Claus doesn't exist ?


----------



## discokermit (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> Man Bites Dog


what's the shoddy agenda there?


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2013)

discokermit said:


> what's the shoddy agenda there?


 
I presume he's referring to the rape scene?


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

The whole film is disgusting


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2013)

I bet Golden Child made you shit a brick


----------



## discokermit (Jan 20, 2013)

Belushi said:


> I presume he's referring to the rape scene?


i still don't get why that's "shoddy"? i thought it tied in with the way the characters making the documentary were drawn more and more into helping him, along with helping him dispose of bodies, using the light off their cameras to find the kid, etc.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i still don't get why that's "shoddy"? i thought it tied in with the way the characters making the documentary were drawn more and more into helping him, along with helping him dispose of bodies, using the light off their cameras to find the kid, etc.


 
I thought it was a good film but there was some controversy over the rape scene iirc


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

It's basically the director indulging his sick fantasies and then turning around and saying to the audience "Haha! You're complicit in this, just for watching it!"  The same could be said for a large number of other films (Funny Games comes to mind).
It's all done under a veneer of pomo irony of course, so if people don't like it you can just accuse them of not getting it.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2013)

That's bollocks tbf.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Jan 20, 2013)

discokermit said:


> i still don't get why that's "shoddy"? i thought it tied in with the way the characters making the documentary were drawn more and more into helping him, along with helping him dispose of bodies, using the light off their cameras to find the kid, etc.


The rape scene, horrible as it is, is key to the point of the film - it is the turning point between the audience being able to sympathise with the random violence and where they find it unacceptable, despite it being strictly appropriate in the plot. Which makes the point. I remember seeing it in the cinema, with the previous laughter at comedic murder suddenly stopping overall when that happened.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> It's basically the director indulging his sick fantasies and then turning around and saying to the audience "Haha! You're complicit in this, just for watching it!" The same could be said for a large number of other films (Funny Games comes to mind).
> It's all done under a veneer of pomo irony of course, so if people don't like it you can just accuse them of not getting it.


 
Nope you really don't get it. And funny you should mention Funny Games because the whole point of the film was that it was a pointed critique of violence depicted in commercial cinema. You are one of those people who think that just because something is shown or said by a character means the action is endorsed by the film-maker, which is the most naive way of approaching representation. Film is a visual medium and when a film is about something, you often have to show it, which isn't the same as approving of something. Your understanding of films is really no different from the views of Mary Whitehouse, who was similarly clueless. No wonder that with this shallow understanding of representation in films, you appear to hate films and stink up every thread on film one here.


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> You are one of those people who think that just because something is shown or said by a character means the action is endorsed by the film-maker, which is the most naive way of approaching representation.


 
Where did you get that from? I thought Monster was a good film, but I don't think the director was endorsing the main character's actions. Same with Downfall.

It's the prurient, voyeuristic nature of these films that I object to, whatever the directors' justifications (social commentary, character study, or other such bollocks).

Can you tell me then you enjoy watching films that consist almost entirely of torture, rape and murder? What does it add to your life that you wouldn't have if you didn't watch them?


----------



## discokermit (Jan 20, 2013)

ok, that's that one sorted, now what about this?




Left said:


> Gremlins


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> Can you tell me then you enjoy watching films that consist almost entirely of torture, rape and murder? What does it add to your life that you wouldn't have if you didn't watch them?


 
Not every film or every moment of every film is there to be "enjoyed".


----------



## discokermit (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> What does it add to your life that you wouldn't have if you didn't watch them?


that's not what the thread is about.


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Your understanding of films is really no different from the views of Mary Whitehouse, who was similarly clueless.


 
criticism is not censorship

why is this so hard for some people to understand?


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

discokermit said:


> ok, that's that one sorted, now what about this?


 

Gremlins is blatantly racist


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> criticism is notcensorship
> 
> why is this so hard for some people to understand?


 
I didn't say you were censorious. I said your understanding of representation is similar to that of Whitehouse.

Why is this so hard to understand ?


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Not every film or every moment of every film is there to be "enjoyed".


 
So what do you get out of it?


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> So what do you get out of it?


 
I'm not going to get into that now with you, because as a fan of horror films I've had this conversation too often on forums and it's become tedious. I'm off to watch A Serbian Film again now and I may masturbate while doing so.


----------



## discokermit (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> Gremlins is blatantly racist


are you saying gremlins has a racist agenda? how?


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)




----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 20, 2013)

Left said:


> Gremlins is blatantly racist


 
Are you Spike Lee in real life?


----------



## Left (Jan 20, 2013)

discokermit said:


> are you saying gremlins has a racist agenda? how?


 
Can't be arsed right now. Do a search, I'm not the first person to notice it.

I'm more interested in why people watch rapey exploitation flicks, but I don't expect I'll ever get an answer to that.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 20, 2013)

FridgeMagnet said:


> The rape scene, horrible as it is, is key to the point of the film - it is the turning point between the audience being able to sympathise with the random violence and where they find it unacceptable, despite it being strictly appropriate in the plot. Which makes the point. I remember seeing it in the cinema, with the previous laughter at comedic murder suddenly stopping overall when that happened.


Yes, I remember that scene stopping me in my tracks. It's very effective - makes you question yourself for laughing along with what went before it.


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

I've heard the Gremlins being racist before. From fuckwits and liberals (an academic difference).

The argument is as follows: black people eat fried chicken. So do Gremlins. Ergo Gremlins are black people.

I've never seen anyone say Gremlins is racist unless they're a kiwifruit, liberal or a troll.


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

I am leaving the kiwifruit fruit in for autocorrection lols.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 20, 2013)

I watch rapey exploitation films in order to hone my disgust at them.


----------



## Belushi (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> The argument is as follows: black people eat fried chicken. So do Gremlins. Ergo Gremlins are black people..


 
You're shitting me right?


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

Belushi said:


> You're shitting me right?


 
Do I look like the kind of person who winds people up?

I am serious! It's so batshit that wiki has only one sentence on it, and wiki gets any ol' shit published 

http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/05/the-50-most-racist-movies/gremlins

Director: Joe Dante
Stars: Zach Galligan, Phoebe Cates, Hoyt Axton, Frances Lee McCain, Corey Feldman, Dick Miller, Judge Reinhold, Glynn Turman

The film's stars, which spawn from a mystical Asian creature called a mogwai, are loud, break-dancing little monsters who devour fried chicken at an unprecedented pace, destroy and devalue property, and even kill good white folks. But they're not meant to represent black youths, though. Definitely not. They're not nearly scary enough.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 20, 2013)

If I stopped watching films with morally repugnant characters carrying out morally repugnant acts then I'd probably have to give up watching films.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

Is the fried chicken thing an American thing?

Pretty sure KFC round my way is full of Honky.


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

There's probably been a thread on here, "is Gremlins racist" with people getting banned on it. Old names like pbman.


----------



## Nanker Phelge (Jan 20, 2013)

Belushi said:


> You're shitting me right?


 
And dance to 'black music'....and wear caps......just like african americans do!


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> There's probably been a thread on here, "is Gremlins racist" with people getting banned on it. Old names like pbman.


 
So what are the Mogwai an allegory for?


----------



## emanymton (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> Do I look like the kind of person who winds people up?
> 
> I am serious! It's so batshit that wiki has only one sentence on it, and wiki gets any ol' shit published
> 
> ...


They have Bulworth in at 8


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

8ball said:


> So what are the Mogwai an allegory for?


 
You'd have to ask Left or some other Terry.


----------



## 8den (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> Do I look like the kind of person who winds people up?
> 
> I am serious! It's so batshit that wiki has only one sentence on it, and wiki gets any ol' shit published
> 
> ...


 
Wait Corey Feldman is in Gremlins?


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

Gremlins 2 has a effete, erudite Gremlin and is therefore homophobic.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

8den said:


> Wait Corey Feldman is in Gremlins?


 
Yup. He plays a friend of the main kid.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> You'd have to ask Left or some other Terry.


 
Not heard 'Terry' used as an insult in 20 years.


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Gremlins 2 has a effete, erudite Gremlin and is therefore homophobic.


 
One for the German facts thread.


----------



## Knotted (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/05/the-50-most-racist-movies/gremlins


 
That's a really mental list.
Third most racist film ever - Planet of the Apes!
http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/05/the-50-most-racist-movies/planet-of-the-apes


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

firky said:


> http://www.complex.com/pop-culture/2012/05/the-50-most-racist-movies/gremlins


 
I admit I thought _Independence Day_ was a spoof when I saw it (hence being the only person in our group of mates who enjoyed it), but fuck it, I'm sticking my neck out and calling spoof on this one too.

edit - actually, looking at the rest of the list, maybe they just thought no one would scroll down that far..


----------



## jelavicroad (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> I'm not going to get into that now with you, because as a fan of horror films I've had this conversation too often on forums and it's become tedious. I'm off to watch A Serbian Film again now and I may masturbate while doing so.





Left said:


> Where did you get that from? I thought Monster was a good film, but I don't think the director was endorsing the main character's actions. Same with Downfall.
> 
> It's the prurient, voyeuristic nature of these films that I object to, whatever the directors' justifications (social commentary, character study, or other such bollocks).
> 
> Can you tell me then you enjoy watching films that consist almost entirely of torture, rape and murder? What does it add to your life that you wouldn't have if you didn't watch them?


 
 big fan of i spit on your grave were you?


----------



## souljacker (Jan 20, 2013)

Gremlins is anti-japanese (or at least anti-japanese industry) but then most of America was in the 80s.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

souljacker said:


> Gremlins is anti-japanese (or at least anti-japanese industry) but then most of America was in the 80s.


 
Never mind that the original owner of the Mogwai who kicks of proceedings is Chinese. There are no Japanese characters or references to Japan in the film.


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Never mind that the original owner of the Mogwai who kicks of proceedings is Chinese. There are no Japanese characters or references to Japan in the film.


 
Was the Mogwai made in Japan?


----------



## Firky (Jan 20, 2013)

8ball said:


> edit - actually, looking at the rest of the list, maybe they just thought no one would scroll down that far..


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

8ball said:


> Was the Mogwai made in Japan?


 
A Mogwai is a Chinese type of demon, though in Chinese mythology they don't start out cute.


----------



## souljacker (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> Never mind that the original owner of the Mogwai who kicks of proceedings is Chinese. There are no Japanese characters or references to Japan in the film.


 
Its nothing to do with where the Mogwai comes from, more to do with one scene at the start where he cant start his shitty Japanese car.

The fried chicken/black people thing is bizarre IMO. I don't even remember the gremlins eating fried chicken.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

souljacker said:


> Its nothing to do with where the Mogwai comes from, more to do with one scene at the start where he cant start his shitty Japanese car.


 
Fucking racists !


----------



## 8ball (Jan 20, 2013)

souljacker said:


> The fried chicken/black people thing is bizarre IMO. I don't even remember the gremlins eating fried chicken.


 
If I had to write a list of the things the Gremlins did in that film, even right after seeing it again so as to refresh my memory, I'm not even sure if 'eating fried chicken' would be on the list.

In case I'm being ethno-centric I took a look at the IMDb entry for Gremlins and can't find anything about fried chicken there either.


----------



## Captain Hurrah (Jan 20, 2013)

souljacker said:


> Its nothing to do with where the Mogwai comes from, more to do with one scene at the start where he cant start his shitty Japanese car.
> 
> The fried chicken/black people thing is bizarre IMO. I don't even remember the gremlins eating fried chicken.


 
You're getting confused about what his chauvinist neighbour (who disparages anything foreign) says when the conversation about the car turns into talk about 'gremlins,' which he describes as little creatures used as weapons for sabotaging aircraft in WWII, which itself is an older myth about faulty airplanes in wartime. It's got nothing to do with anti-Japanese sentiment, just using that myth (little creatures who delight in causing death and destruction by messing with machines) for when the unrelated _Chinese_ Mogwais transform into malevolent little shits.


----------



## Reno (Jan 20, 2013)

I think the idea with Gremlins was to satirise what a largely white, middle class small town community like the one in the film would find threatening, so anarchic creatures like the gremlins in the film display among other things stereotypical behaviour of black urban people, but that's only one of many perceived urban stereotypes they resort to. Joe Dante has always been a lefty satirist and this becomes even more clear in Gremlins 2, where the creatures are anti-heroes rather than villains and are shown to be a deserved scourge to US capitalist excess and corporate culture in general and the likes of Donald Trump in particular. So it's not that Gremlins said black people are like that, if the Gremlins indulge in stereotypical "black" behaviour, but it's that they play to the fears and prejudices of comfy, largely white US small town.

It's a satire on the "white flight" where the white middle classes abandoned the inner cities to move to places like the one in the film and when the gremlins come after them, it's a paranoid fantasy of everything they thought they'd escaped from.


----------



## 8den (Jan 20, 2013)

8ball said:


> If I had to write a list of the things the Gremlins did in that film, even right after seeing it again so as to refresh my memory, I'm not even sure if 'eating fried chicken' would be on the list.
> 
> In case I'm being ethno-centric I took a look at the IMDb entry for Gremlins and can't find anything about fried chicken there either.


 
They break the clock so the kid thinks it's not midnight, and he feeds them chicken.


----------



## 8den (Jan 20, 2013)

Reno said:


> I think the idea with Gremlins was to satirise what a largely white, middle class small town community like the one in the film would find threatening, so anarchic creatures like the gremlins in the film display among other things stereotypical behaviour of black urban people, but that's only one of many perceived urban stereotypes they resort to. Joe Dante has always been a lefty satirist and this becomes even more clear in Gremlins 2, where the creatures are anti-heroes rather than villains and are shown to be a deserved scourge to US capitalist excess and corporate culture in general and the likes of Donald Trump in particular. So it's not that Gremlins said black people are like that, if the Gremlins indulge in stereotypical "black" behaviour, but it's that they play to the fears and prejudices of comfy, largely white US small town.
> 
> It's a satire on the "white flight" where the white middle classes abandoned the inner cities to move to places like the one in the film and when the gremlins come after them, it's a paranoid fantasy of everything they thought they'd escaped from.


 
I'm sorry the person who came up with this theory probably subscribes to Hooper X's theory on Star Wars in a completely unironic level


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

8den said:


> I'm sorry *the person* who came up with this theory probably subscribes to Hooper X's theory on Star Wars in a completely unironic level




What person (apart from what Joe Dante has done throughout his career ?) ? And what has this to do with any of what I said in regard to what the gremlins represent.


----------



## 8den (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> What person (apart from what Joe Dante has done throughout his career ?) ? And what has this to do with any of what I said in regard to what the gremlins represent.


 
This person


> Since its release, some people have criticized _Gremlins_ as being culturally insensitive. Some observers have commented that the film presents gremlins as African Americans,[15] In _Ceramic Uncles & Celluloid Mammies_, *Patricia Turner* writes that the gremlins "reflect negative African-American stereotypes" in their dress and behavior. They are shown "devouring fried chicken with their hands", listening to black music, breakdancing, and wearing sunglasses after dark and newsboy caps, a style common among African American males in the 1980s


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gremlins#Allegations_of_racism

It's why I think film theory and cultural theory about film is complete wank.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Ah ok. I thought you meant I was quoting somebody.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 21, 2013)

8ball said:


> As well as _Hero:_
> 
> _Gladiator_ - fascist propaganda
> _300_ - fascist propaganda
> I have my suspicions about _The Dark Knight Rises_, too...


 
Theres one scene in Dark Knight Returns (or whatever its called, one where the Joker shows up everyone fawns cos the actor died) which is particularly dodgy

"Go home and stop pretending to be batman"
"Whats the difference between me and you? I want to help"
"I'm not wearing hockey pads"

So the moral of the story is its ok to be a vigilante if you've got enough money for body armour and can afford a small armoured car, gotcha

Also Disneys Cinderella - I'm pretty sure the Mice helping her out can be seen as black servants...


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 21, 2013)

Artaxerxes said:


> Theres one scene in Dark Knight Returns (or whatever its called, one where the Joker shows up everyone fawns cos the actor died) which is particularly dodgy
> 
> "Go home and stop pretending to be batman"
> "Whats the difference between me and you? I want to help"
> ...


 

I don't believe in harvey dent


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Artaxerxes said:


> Also Disneys Cinderella - I'm pretty sure the Mice helping her out can be seen as black servants...


 
You've got the wrong critters in the wrong Disney film. It's the crows in Dumbo which have always been considered a bit dodgy when it comes to black stereotypes.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> You've got the wrong critters in the wrong Disney film. It's the crows in Dumbo which have always been considered a bit dodgy when it comes to black stereotypes.


 
I'm fairly sure more than 1 film can be racist.


----------



## Reno (Jan 21, 2013)

Artaxerxes said:


> I'm fairly sure more than 1 film can be racist.


 
Cute animals helping a fairy tale princess out of a lurch is not in itself racist. Unlike the crows, the mice are in no way sterotyped as having "black characteristics" and they are her friends. You'd have to do an awful lot of projecting to construe "being helpful" as being black.

If you think the mice are racist, watch Disney's Song of the South, it will give you a heart atttack.


----------



## Artaxerxes (Jan 21, 2013)

Reno said:


> Cute animals helping a fairy tale princess out of a lurch is not in itself racist. Unlike the crows, the mice are in no way sterotyped as having "black characteristics" and they are her friends. You'd have to do an awful lot of projecting to construe "being helpful" as being black.
> 
> If you think the mice are racist, watch Disney's Song of the South, it will give you a heart atttack.


 
Its more a case of "ok so these are the things that do the work, Cindy bonds with them, the rest of the house doesnt notice them, its a large house you'd expect a staff, they are kind of clumsy, etc, etc"

I suspect I'd been watching to much Downton Abbey or something when I came up with the theory.


----------



## littlebabyjesus (Jan 21, 2013)

Artaxerxes said:


> Its more a case of "ok so these are the things that do the work, Cindy bonds with them, the rest of the house doesnt notice them, its a large house you'd expect a staff, they are kind of clumsy, etc, etc"
> 
> I suspect I'd been watching to much Downton Abbey or something when I came up with the theory.


Maybe a case where the conflation of race and class in the US can make things tricky to unpick sometimes. A show set in the UK like DA can portray exactly the same set-up in terms of social class without raising any uncomfortable issues about race because everyone in it is white. A show set in the US in the same times can't avoid race as an issue.


----------



## not-bono-ever (Jan 21, 2013)

crows are a classic image of harbingers of doom n stuff innit


----------



## Reno (Jan 22, 2013)

not-bono-ever said:


> crows are a classic image of harbingers of doom n stuff innit


 
But not the crows in Dumbo, who become Dumbo's friends and who help him gain self confidence. In many ways Dumbo is the most progressive of all Disney films in that it stands up for the outsider rather than the conformist. It's just that the crows had the stereotypical characteristics that were associated with black men at the time, which has been criticised.


----------



## DotCommunist (Jan 26, 2013)

not-bono-ever said:


> crows are a classic image of harbingers of doom n stuff innit


 

classical psychopomp ennit


----------



## Stigmata (Jan 26, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I don't believe in harvey dent


 
Not saying I disagree with it completely, but that's a very selective interpretation of the film. Are we supposed to sympathise with Dent's parable about the ancient Romans suspending democracy, or is it the first hint to the audience that he's a bit of a wrongun?


----------



## rekil (May 22, 2013)

Won't Back Down


> Two determined mothers with children who are failing in an inner city school in Pittsburgh join forces to take back the school, and turn it into a place of learning. But before they can change the school for the better, they must first battle the parents, the school board, and the teachers union. Because this is for their children, they won't back down from this enormous challenge.


Charter school propaganda apparently.


----------



## Left (May 22, 2013)

That film - blonde woman goes into tough inner city school and saves the kids by playing them Bob Dylan - what was it called?
That was pretty shoddy


----------



## DotCommunist (May 22, 2013)

Left said:


> That film - blonde woman goes into tough inner city school and saves the kids by playing them Bob Dylan - what was it called?
> That was pretty shoddy


 

Dangerous Minds?

scored by Coolios cover of the Stevie clasic pastime paradise


----------



## DotCommunist (May 22, 2013)

not strictly  cover obvs


----------

