In Reply to: So, sarcasm aside, why do *you* suppose H'wood makes so many unprofitable f'n R movies? posted by clarkjohnsen on June 14, 2007 at 09:47:42:
was sarcastic, but I think that using Michael Medved as a cultural model is akin to asking Rush Limbaugh for dietary advice. I have virtually zero respect for him as a reviewer, because he carries so much religious/political baggage, and is more-than-willing to expose it in his reviews.
As far as coarse language in film, perhaps it's all subjective. As much as I liked 'The Big Lebowski', the constant f-word usage drove me nuts! Yet, perhaps ironically, the constant cursing in 'Deadwood' seems entirely appropriate to the mood/atmosphere of the setting. Why the difference? Who the hell knows, but I think that's why movies are movies, and we need to just let their makers do what they will. In the end, we as the viewers decide what is appropriate. Can you imagine a movie about the mafia without cursing? Of course not-though 'The Godfather' exhibited much less of it than 'The Sopranos'. Which is right-only you can decide.
Vaya con dios
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Thanks for the non-confrontational reply. Yes, my response - powermatic 22:55:00 06/14/07 (5)
- "Using Michael Medved as a cultural model is akin to asking Rush Limbaugh for dietary advice." Hmm... - clarkjohnsen 07:01:17 06/15/07 (4)
- Rush lost weight? Maybe hillbilly heroin has dietary - powermatic 13:47:15 06/15/07 (3)
- Be my guest: Ignore the facts and sneer away to your heart's content. nt - clarkjohnsen 07:12:40 06/16/07 (2)
- The point, clark, is that the quality of a film has nothing to do with - powermatic 21:49:35 06/17/07 (0)
- No Clark you are right about the money. - Analog Scott 14:45:51 06/16/07 (0)