 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
1.36.24.122
So it's kind of weird to me that people have issues with violence in films. They state baseless opinions that film violence leads to real world violence which is easily knocked down by looking at 1) history and 2) other countries. There was plenty of violence (arguably more violence) before the advent of film than there is today and 2) countries like japan and South Korea - that produce some of the most horrendously violent gory films (that make Hollywood violence laughable) are some of the least violent countries on the planet. Granted those countries don't own guns but we'll leave correlational facts out of this.
Film is a means to live vicariously through others. The idea of taking revenge on Hitler through a film and filling that ass full of lead is gratifying and while many people may wish to pull the trigger if they could probably don't have the stomach for it.
Take this very internet forum - people talk a tough game when they type at a keyboard but will they come up to your face and call you out it in person (unarmed)? It is a way to release your anger in a relatively safe manner because we all know that there is a punishment coming for real world violence. Film is an escapism.
Take the Kill Bill Movies - the violence here is comical to the down right absurd - is live action Japanese Anime - Tarantino even goes to the length of a lengthy anime sequence to show the most violent scene in the movie.
So stop being girly men. "wah I saw a scene of violence - wah"
The scene in Pulp Fiction when Vincent's gun accidentally goes off blowing the brains out of the rear passenger - is played for a laugh - the entire audience roared with laughter at the scene - then probably thought "holy cow I just laughed at a horrendously violent scene" - Yup - masterful.
You know it's a Tarantino film when
Follow Ups:
gold.
too many people over analyze films to the point of boredom.
who really cares ?
time is short so entertain me !
NT
"Saving Private Ryan" showed immense amounts of it with no outrcries on that point that I remember. Rather, gratuitous violence in films is the issue: is it appropriate to the story, i.e. is it a slasher film? Specific to Tarantino: he often has stated his fondness for violent genres. To attend his films and be upset at the explicit violence seems clearly self-defeating.
When younger, I enjoyed them. Now, I find the more violent scenes disgusting, unnecessary. Tarantino was hailed a a wunderkind when younger; his many-genre influenced style was new, exciting. Now, it seems tawdry, repetitious, and cynical.
The violence in 'Reservoir Dogs' was the only time I felt queasy in one of his violent scenes. Outside of that, it's just business, nothing personal.
Take the hypo plunge into Uma. "Quease" instantly erased by her reaction. He has, to me, always had a way to balance the equation. Take Sam's endless, oft obnoxious monologs offset by violence. Violence is actually a relief from his dialog.
.
reelsmith's axiom: Its going to be used equipment when I sell it, so it may as well be used equipment when I buy it.
QT was a repetitive three trick pony up until OUATIH where he altered a trick.
IF he makes another movie (OMG! A TENTH Quentin Tarantino movie!?! STOP the presses!!!)
it will be interesting to see if OUATIH was actual growth from the celebrated puer aeternus
or not.
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
Just had to get a movie star reference in there while discussing film, huh?
"Once this was all Black Plasma and Imagination" -Michael McClure
With me there's no wah, I just simply don't enjoy violence in movies, or in general. Don't watch violent movies, any form of fighting (watched Ali when I was young, nothing else). Not a Tarantino fan, just not my taste.
To each their own.
Yeah, I would rather not hang with such shocking images, but it is a business, and sensational images sells tickets.
some of the modern effects are so realistic and stunning, I just look away. Worked for me as a kid, why change something that works? They expand to full screen stuff that is invisible in real life, because of the images that are now possible. Bullets entering and exiting the body in great detail comes to mind.
Macbeth is not all cotton candy either, it obviously depends on who tells the tale.
I think some of the criticisms here do a disservice to Tarantino's work.
There are complaints about the shallowness of so much predictable amounts of violence yet never explore the intent of why the movie was constructed in such a way. It is not as though he has limited skills, and movies selling sensational violence are all he can manage. just look at the variety of the movies made, modern crime, western, army all kinds of settings, all pulled off well
I guess the guy will never make a space movie though. With all that violence, and realistic space suits, it would be a very short film.
As Tarantino himself said in a very telling quote, that finding new expression was tough for him, since his first movie where he had enough creative control to say everything he wanted to say in a film, Pulp Fiction, was so well excepted by the public .
He figured it such a temporary industry, that with his first big shot, he threw in everything he wanted to say in that movie.
I guess that explains the hateful eight. That is a lot of money to leave on the table if that film doesn't get made, and it certainly doesn't pretend to be more than the od war movies it apes.
NT
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
