A Goon
Some people are only alive because it is illegal to shoot them.
- Rasheman
This timer script has existed for 5099.534 days.
Modified: August 09 2006.
Hits: 6715744/10468599
User: Anonymous Coward
Time: 0.04 seconds.

Read Message

You can hate Titantic for all I care though :P

Author: styx ()
Date: 2000-04-12 00:00:00

On 4/12/00 at 19:31 styx wrote:
>To make this short, blunt, and to the point (in otherwords, concise) you're totally wrong, Braveheart was NOT a generic. It happened to be one of the best movies in the year, so I don't know where you get the word Generic from..

>
>
On 4/12/00 at 19:16 SM_007 wrote:
>
>I was just thinking about this Christian website I found (well, actually, a friend of mine found it - but since that's not the point at all, I am now going to close this bracket like so), where they really bashed one of my favourite movies, Magnolia, despite the fact that they admitted that the film itself was brilliant, moving, and was one of the more complex films ever made. They hated the film because there was too much swearing, sex (and that is very untrue, not that it didn't have enough, but, well, you know), violence, domestic problems, and that sorta crapola. Basically, they wanted a film that wasn't true to life at all. Maybe in their little Christian fantasy world there's no family problems, no domestic violence, no rape, no people getting molested, no swearing and no taking the Lord's name in vain, but I live in a real life where there people do really have these problems.

>>I apologize to any Christians I have offended; this isn't meant to bash religion or Christianity at all. Rather, it's meant to bash these people who love a damn good film about real life, but tell other Christians online not to see it since it is obviously a sinful movie and isn't about real life as long as there is these real life situations and problems in it. And that's when I started thinking about movies that really don't apply to real life. Movies that are supposed to be "true stories." Movies that cost millions to make, movies that have some handsome Hollywood actor, and movies that get millions and millions and millions back from the box office, thanks to hype. But is there any real substance to these films at all?

>>That's why when I mention typical Hollywood crap, I always bring up names of movies that piss me off, like Titanic and Braveheart. Let's take a look at Titanic, for instance: Here's a movie that had a teen heartthrob, a movie with big flasy special effects and production values, a movie that took a lot of money to make, a movey made by an egotistical director who produces the same sort of movies over and over and over and over, and a movie with a plot so unrealistic that my head almost spun when I was watching it. Do you think what happens between Jack and Rose can be applied to real life? That would never, ever happen. Mark my words. Yet, a gigantic ship did actually sink! I believe the name of that ship was the Titanic. Strange how that's the subplot of the whole freakin' movie. And before you say, "I'd like to see you do any better!" let me tell you that I can do better. Trust me on this one. Being a director is my ultimate dream. Well, a director/writer/producer, since I wouldn't trust anyone to make my movie with my vision. I'd need to do it all myself, and if I had the actors (good ones, not Hollywood actors), the cash, and the production team (a compitent one), I could make some damn fine movies...though not everyone would like them. Not everyone would pay attention and get them. Not everyone would really see the deeper aspects of the plot. Kinda like Magnolia.

>>And when I look at Braveheart, I see the same damn thing. I could have made a generic film like Braveheart, and if I could, I'd probably make a few just to get rich. But I'd prefer to make serious, real films that have some semblence of quality attached to them. Anyone who has done any real research on the real William Wallace knows for a fact that they totally screwed up history and his character in the film. So why make a movie about a real event as opposed to making a film that's totally fictional and do the same damn thing with the entire plot? I get really f'n pissed off at these sorts of films that totally take a serious aspect of history and screw it all up just so they could have some typical Hollywood formulatic crap. See where I am going with this?

>>So, in closing, some of my favourite films are movies like Fargo, A Simple Plan, Magnolia, American Beauty, The Usual Suspects and Pulp Fiction. Those were original, interesting, and had good acting to boot. Good plot, good acting - the whole bit. That doesn't mean I don't like some movies which are kinda typical. Movies like Terminator 2 and The Matrix are movies I love, along with the Star Wars trilogy, since they are all fun movies with decent plots and a deeper message (and plus, I am just a big science fiction fan). I'll take a serious movie that makes me think any day of the week over typical Hollywood crap.

>>So, I can tell you right now: Don't see The Skulls, or like my friend called it, "A conspiracy theory for twelve year olds." I know already that the movie stinks. And I can spot those movies a mile away, usually. I hope this isn't too preachy; I'd love to get feedback (especially someone disagreeing and therefore challenging my views - I'm a sucker for a good debate, hehe), and opinions on what others think. I was just really pissed off, thanks to that ignorant review, which got me thinking of the ignorant moviemakers and the people whom watch and love these movies without putting it in perspective and realizing there isn't much substance to those films. It's like when people really hate Slaughterhouse-Five and Lord of the Flies, two of my favourite books, because they didn't see how much stuff you could see when you look into these books.

>>Then again, this could also just be another example of my two cents, Canadian...

>>SM_007
>
>
>
It's time to bust a rhyme! *Does the evahl happy disco dance.*

>"Look not at the man, but the beast within. For it is human nature to be oblivious"

>Styx

"Look not at the man, but the beast within. For it is human nature to be oblivious"

Styx

Why I hate Braveheart and Titanic. [I want feedback!] - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
-Die! - BandWidth - 2000-04-13 00:00:00
-Um... - SoulTaker - 2000-04-13 00:00:00
-why I liked them. - Tridus - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
-Uhh you're saying Braveheart is generic? - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
--That was your response?! - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
---Yes it was. - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
----I wouldn't have been able to reply to your points if I hadn't seen your point of view. - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
--You can hate Titantic for all I care though :P - styx - 2000-04-12 00:00:00
---Hehehe. *Stabs Leo DeCaprio to death with a spork.* - SM_007 - 2000-04-12 00:00:00