Films/DVD Asylum

Animal House, which you obviously never saw, was a send-up of

63.176.25.128

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ Thread: Display All Email ] [ Films/DVD Asylum ]

(A)

In Reply to: Re: What you will never understand. posted by Victor Khomenko on February 10, 2004 at 06:13:46:

elite college snobs, like....W, for instance.
It was a comedy and a satire. If you didn't attend American college, or understand American views on sex at that time, I can understand your failure to appreciate it. It is really an hysterically funny film which has achieved cult status, appreciated by a wide-spectrum of folks.

Follow Ups:

Your presumptuousness is deafening - Victor Khomenko 08:39:29 02/10/04 (10)
"Animal House, which you obviously never saw..." He-he... must be soothing to be making silly statements like that. When you have nothing better to say, this will do.
Saw it several times.
***It is really an hysterically funny film which has achieved cult status, appreciated by a wide-spectrum of folks.
Funny... you see that as an achievemt, as success... oh-ho... and I see that as its damnation.
- Maybe I'm presumptuous also - J 08:58:11 02/11/04 (9)
  It sure sounds to me like you were not much of a fan of the National Lampoon, the satire magazine responsible for Animal House (not Belushi). In fact, I'm willing to bet you never saw a copy of this magazine during the 70s or knew anything about the people who published it. If they hadn't picked him to play the part of the clown/slob in that movie, it would've been someone else. They wrote the stories upon which that movie was based ("Tales Of The Adelphian Lodge" first ran in 1975), and it was them & Sean Kelly who were mostly responsible for that movie being made, NOT Belushi. I don't see you mentioning the name of Douglas Kenney here? Chris Miller? I'm sorry, you're arguing nonsense because you don't like the guy up on the screen. I was reading Nat Lampoon in the 70s, were you? If you're going to tell me that THEY are responsible for some kind of degradation of American culture, I'd sure like to see you come up with some examples & back up yr argument with some facts. Oh, and as for the effect of the movie on children--it was, after all, rated 'R.'
  - But of course you ain't - Victor Khomenko 09:24:30 02/11/04 (8)
    ***I was reading Nat Lampoon in the 70s, were you?
    Of course not. In the seventies I was reading Rousseau, Schopenhauer and Solzhenitsyn... ah, and some Rostand, but Troy already forbade me to mention his name.
    So, first Troy trying to convince me America is not about quoting Cyrano, now you...
    Thanks... I guess... for this wisdom.
    - What? No Tolkein? :-) (nt) - mvwine 12:06:31 02/11/04 (1)
      NT!
      
      In Vino Veritas
      - LOL! I guess I was past my "young adult" stage by then. (nt) - Victor Khomenko 12:16:36 02/11/04 (0)
        
        In Reply to: What? No Tolkein? :-) (nt) posted by mvwine on February 11, 2004 at 12:06:31:
        
        .
    - Re: But - rico 11:18:21 02/11/04 (0)
      Did you read Kant's "Critique of Pure Reason" in the original German?
    - I'm not impressed - J 10:31:33 02/11/04 (4)
      I don't recognize one name on that list, so I don't know if you're being facetious or whether or not you're trying to pass yrself off as an intellectual. Regardless, outside of the fact that I didn't ask you what you DID read, whatever it was you were reading clearly didn't enable you to understand satire when you see it; nor did it equip you with the ability to blame the correct party in a situation such as this where you find fault with a movie actor & blame him for 'creating' that which was actually created by others. Not sure how Troy's comment has anything do with this; seems to me it's more a case of you not having yr facts straight.
      Belushi was no saint & deserves criticism for his poor handling of his drug problem as well as his lack of professionalism on television programs & movie sets--but not only is he not guilty of the sins you are taking him to task for, you make yrself look idiotic by allowing yr dislike for him to project onto yr unjustly blaming him for as much as you do.
      - Re: It's clear... - rico 11:20:13 02/11/04 (3)
        
        In Reply to: I'm not impressed posted by J on February 11, 2004 at 10:31:33:
        
        you yourself did not attend Harvard if indeed you do not recognize one name on the list.
        
        Re: It's clear... - J 11:27:39 02/11/04 (2)
        
        In Reply to: Re: It's clear... posted by rico on February 11, 2004 at 11:20:13:
        
        Yeah, no kidding. But I'm willing to admit that, and I had the courage to admit I wasn't familiar with those names, too. Meanwhile, at least I know satire when I see it. And I don't argue bullsh*t when I don't have facts to back up my argument. I didn't require an Ivy League education to understand these things.
        
        Don't worry about the Ivy League - Victor Khomenko 12:00:51 02/11/04 (1)
        
        In Reply to: Re: It's clear... posted by J on February 11, 2004 at 11:27:39:
        
        I know someone who graduated from Harward and who is, in terms of his cultural develepment, still living in the VERY Dark Ages.
        Education and culture are only remotely connected.
        
        Re: Don't worry about the Ivy League - orejones 12:35:33 02/11/04 (0)
        
        In Reply to: Don't worry about the Ivy League posted by Victor Khomenko on February 11, 2004 at 12:00:51:
        
        "I know someone who graduated from Harward and who is, in terms of his cultural develepment, still living in the VERY Dark Ages."
        Please don�t bring Mr. Bush here: that�s what Outside is for...
        Regards
        BF

This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:

Parts Connexion

You can not post to an archived thread.