Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Sometimes I miss the production code


Recommended Posts

There is plenty of cursing in O Brother, most of it done by Clooney's character, and by Pete. God's name is used in vain plenty. And it was unnecessary. But the movie is a classic, a delight, a microscopic gander at our country's history, a nod to ancient literature, and just a great movie. And I think the Coens are geniuses. Every time one watches this movie, something new will appear. And if you need to laugh, put this on and forget the world.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Don'tCallMeSugar wrote:}{quote}

> > I don't know if that is entirely true...For example I saw The Wolfman twice as well as seeing both True Grit and The King's Speech twice. I only saw The Fighter once but the showing I got to go to was the last showing that the theater had...

 

So from this I am assuming you too are closer to collecting Social Security that the younger adult population? Or if I am wrong, then you ARE in the latter age area?

Link to post
Share on other sites

There might have been some swear words in O Brother but I don't remember anything extensive and I saw the film fairly recently. There is also minor curse words and saying the F word constantly. For example I don't think saying God's name in vain is all that awful personally. And even hearing the F word in a film on ocassion (depending on the circumstances) doesn't bother me all that much.

 

Of course the way characters talk in a Coen brothers film says a whole lot about their character.

 

Edited by: Kinokima on Mar 3, 2011 12:42 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Kinokima said:

<< don't remember any curses in True Grit or O Brother. >>

 

I am glad you made that post because I like to bring up desensitivity. If you remember George Clooney and Charles Durning did say SOB several times. Today we sort of don't look at that phrase or a simple damn as profanity.

 

Clark Gable at the end of "Gone with the Wind" was the first person to break the Hays Code rule by saying damn at the very end of GWTW. I was told by our local theatre manager that people were actually shocked by that. LOL! Have we ever came a long way. We all think today that Clark Gable using that most famous of all lines made GWTW to have the most classic ending. Do you language purist want *that* Frankly my dear, I don't give a damn *EDITED* out?

 

Does anyone think the movie "Patton" is completely loaded with profanity? Many channels now don't edit SOB out of it. I still remembered a very heavy edited "Patton" back in the 1970's - 80's.

 

I like to tell you all about overkill in editing. Before I purchased the DVD "Prancer", I watched it on one of the christian broadcast channels (I think it was GMC) and they edited out the most lamest thing ever. All Abe Vigoda originally said was Oh my god, its a reindeer after thinking he was sent for a farm animal. That was edited out because just using God in any way like that is still taking it in vain. I can't comprehend what they would do to Al Pacino in "Scarface". ROFL!

 

I see now why GMC airs "Little House on the Prairie", that episode when Laura's little sister said damn at the dinner table and was scolded by Charles Ingalls. Laura said, dad I can tell her what not to say, he replied, Oh you know all the bad words? After saying no, Charles said, you better not!

 

We all know what Ralphie said in "A Christmas Story" to get a bar of Lifebuoy in the mouth, can only imagine what would had happen if Laura's little sister used it, lol!

 

If one notices they have been using the F word in PG-13 movies, I think the line of thought is, if it is only used once, its OK. Will people 30 years from now be treating the F word like we treat damn today?

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=fxreyman wrote:}{quote}...

>

> So from this I am assuming you too are closer to collecting Social Security that the younger adult population? Or if I am wrong, then you ARE in the latter age area?

 

Actually the best thing to assume is that I am in my early to mid-twenties...

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> Can I call you "sugar", cause you sound sweet to me. :) I agree with everything you just said.

No...

 

That's one of my favorite lines from that movie and my wife says it just to get me to say "Don't call me sugar"

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote}

>

> If one notices they have been using the F word in PG-13 movies, I think the line of thought is, if it is only used once, its OK. Will people 30 years from now be treating the F word like we treat damn today?

 

It's interesting you say that because I think that word is losing it's quote-unquote gusto. I saw Lakeview Terrace and was surprised that although it is PG-13 they use that word twice. It wasn't just saying once and then saying it again twenty minutes later. It was the very next line that it was used again

Link to post
Share on other sites

*Most of Tarantino's films are more violent in nature than in actual bloodshed. Take a look at Pulp Fiction. Most of the violence happens offscreen or is only hinted at or you see the aftermath of it rather than the actual act.*

 

You must not have seen KILL BILL V.1, specifically the massacre in the nightclub restaurant, where he used the stylistic device of black and white, but where the bloodshed is all too real and profuse.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=Arturo wrote:}{quote}

>

> You must not have seen KILL BILL V.1, specifically the massacre in the nightclub restaurant, where he used the stylistic device of black and white, but where the bloodshed is all too real and profuse.

 

The first post I wrote said "I'm not talking about Kill Bill volume 1" but after my rewrite I forgot to put it back in...My mistake

Link to post
Share on other sites

*I am not saying that most audiences of today want to see these newer sex-violence films, only a certain amount of film-goers are going to see these films. The same people who go see The King's Speech or True Grit, or The Fighter are in a different category all-together.*

 

More than one category, I would say. I know a number of people who went to see TRUE GRIT and THE FIGHTER, because of the action and/or violence, but would NEVER see THE KING'S SPEECH because it is about Brits, the Royal Family, all talk and no action, or all of these.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don'tCallMeSugar wrote:

"...That's one of my favorite lines from that movie and my wife says it just to get me to say "Don't call me sugar" "

 

Sorry, I feel I should know this: what movie is that line from? *Some Like it Hot* ?

 

(I realize this has nothing to do with swearing or violence. Maybe sex.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> Don'tCallMeSugar wrote:

> "...That's one of my favorite lines from that movie and my wife says it just to get me to say "Don't call me sugar" "

>

> Sorry, I feel I should know this: what movie is that line from? *Some Like it Hot* ?

>

> (I realize this has nothing to do with swearing or violence. Maybe sex.)

 

You should know it indeed. It's from Gone With The Wind.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, that explains it -my not recognizing the line, I mean. I really don't like *Gone with the Wind* and haven't watched it in years. Not to derail the topic of the thread too much, but I think this extremely famous movie is over-rated. But the fault is possibly mine, not the film's; I very rarely enjoy any movie that's longer than 90 minutes, 2 hours tops. I hate epics. GWTW should have ended with Scarlet's holding up that handful of Tara's soil and vowing she'd never be hungry again. Music swells up, the end. No, not the end, it's just the intermission. Another hour and a half of melodramatics.

Sorry, I should give this well-beloved picture another chance. Maybe when I've made an evening gown out of my living room curtains.

 

Hey, I will say this: the production code worked very well in GWTW, the sexual chemistry between Rhett and Scarlet was conveyed most effectively without a single sex scene -just a kiss.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> Well, that explains it -my not recognizing the line, I mean. I really don't like *Gone with the Wind* and haven't watched it in years. Not to derail the topic of the thread too much, but I think this extremely famous movie is over-rated.

 

Well, maybe they can make an edition for Canada. Maybe they can CGI in some big icebergs, glaciers, and walruses. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> Well, that explains it -my not recognizing the line, I mean. I really don't like *Gone with the Wind* and haven't watched it in years. Not to derail the topic of the thread too much, but I think this extremely famous movie is over-rated. But the fault is possibly mine, not the film's; I very rarely enjoy any movie that's longer than 90 minutes, 2 hours tops. I hate epics. GWTW should have ended with Scarlet's holding up that handful of Tara's soil and vowing she'd never be hungry again. Music swells up, the end. No, not the end, it's just the intermission. Another hour and a half of melodramatics.

> Sorry, I should give this well-beloved picture another chance. Maybe when I've made an evening gown out of my living room curtains.

>

 

I'm the exact opposite. I love epics.

 

I understand your position...I can't always get through the movie in one sitting...It usually will take me a couple days to finish it (part I on one day and part II the next)

 

Don't be sorry...You at least gave reasons for not liking it. When one says they don't like a movie but gives no reasoning why it leads me to believe that they haven't seen it and are just a troll.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=hamradio wrote:}{quote}

> FredCDobbs wrote:

> << Quite a lot of people stopped going to movies in theaters when they gradually turned into mostly trash. >>

>

> After seeing this advertised on TV, you got a very good point. Even a Rated G movie can be suited for the dumpster. I'm simply speaking of the *quality!*

>

> gnomeo_and_juliet_ver2.jpg

>

> Edited by: hamradio on Mar 2, 2011 11:37 PM

 

My goodness. That's my husband up there...LOL

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> I 've noticed a lot of people on these boards have it in for the Coen brothers. They always cite violence and swearing as two evils perpetrated by the Coens in their filmmaking. I really don't understand this; they do have violence in many of their films, but they also have quite a few with no or very little violence whatsoever. ( *O Brother Where Art Thou?*, *Intolerable Cruelty*, *A Serious Man* ...)

> When they have a lot of cursing, as Kinokima observed, it's because of a certain character given to cursing.

> I do acknowledge that the Coens are not for everybody's taste, and I will be the first to concede that they've made their share of failed movies (I hesitate to use the word "bad"), but it seems that it's always the Coens who are brought up as the whipping boys for concerns over excessive violence in current cinema (nobody can accuse them of graphic sex scenes). There are other respected filmmakers who have used violence in their films that's at least as graphic and disturbing as the Coens, but nobody mentions them eg, Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino.

>

> All three of the filmmakers I've named above do often use graphic violence in their movies, sometimes excessively and unnecessarily. But I would argue that these same films are about a lot more than violence, that all three of these directors tell good stories, feature three-dimensional characters , and examine serious issues. And sometimes they're funny, too.

 

 

Not to mention Raising Arizona--the main characters, even the escaped convicts don;t swear much at all. What violence there is is there for a reason. And it's a very funny movie.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I keep hearing about all the sex and violence in today's movies, and yeah, there is a lot of it. But movies of the past aren;t always less violent--they're just less spectacularly violent. There are fewer fiery explosions, and there are fewer shootings. But there's quite a bit of violence; the main difference is it's personal violence. As much as I love film noir for the dialogue, the way the men think it's ok to smack the women around in those movies kinda turns me off. And everything seems to be settled between men by fistfight. And before someone jumps in and starts talking about the kind of movie made today where things are settled by gunfire, the shocking thing about violence in older movies is the way it doesn't seem to be confined to the ghetto or criminals. Perfectly respectable middle class men duke it out and no one thinks anything of it. I don;t know--is there that much difference?

 

I'm in agreement about the sex, though I think there are some old movies that could have done with a bit more. The first one that pops into my head is Morocco --Dietrich gives Cooper her room key and it seems that these are not the kind of people who "date" but the script gives them one chaste kiss behind a fan, then he gets arrested before they even get to a tasteful fadeout.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh I am laughing about MissWonderlys post about GWTW. Hysterical. When I was first married I tried to get my husband to watch GWTW and he passed out before the burning of Atlanta. I love epics though.

 

Like some others said, violence is ok with me if it serves a purpose. War movies should have violence so i would expect that. I like vampire movies and shows, heck I've even watched those horrible TWilight movies, again vampires are violent so i'm ok with some violence. I don't like shock violence or unnecessary violence.

 

Lisa...typing very poorly on her iPad

Link to post
Share on other sites

Watch the movie again, for the varied reasons I mentioned in my posting. I suppose I just felt it diminished Clooney's character, since he was the one with some quasi-intellectual paint. Just enjoy the movie for the laugh value, if for no other reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So you question perfectly respectable men settling things with any type of violence in old movies? I would much prefer that to the more recent movies involving women with all kinds of weapons pursuing vendettas (Kill Bill 1 and 2 as an example). I am a great horror movie buff, if the horror movie is great, and I don't mind the gore when it is germane. But violence for violence's sake is just rather nauseating, and as for sex, just watch prime time sitcoms and series. I get sick of seeing heteros, homos, trans, bias, and everything else rolling around everywhere; sex has been introduced into everything, even egg commercials. I realize I'm ranting here, but fade-out leaves one to one's own devices, and the imagination is much more intriguing than watching two people (whatever their proclivities) swap various and sundry body fluids on the screen. Imagine watching these things appear unexpectedly during the family hour, with your 10-year-old grandchild in the room... I could go on forever but I won't. Just had to reply, 'cause this sorta touched a nerve.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't resist adding to your comment about *O Brother Where Art Thou?* : I"m assuming most people here, being classic movie fans, know that the title of this Coen brothers film is an homage to Preston Sturges' great 1941 comedy, *Sullivan's Travels*. In that fine little movie, the main character, who is a popular and successful director, wants to make a "serious" film about the suffering of humanity, called "Brother, Where Art Thou"? The director is played by the lovable and always entertaining JOEL McCREA, and his lovely female friend, by Veronica Lake. This film is a lot of fun, I recommend it.

 

But I digress.

 

The Coens' *O Brother Where Art Thou* is, as you said, quite funny; it's also a very well-done period piece (1930s), and an engaging story. But almost the best reason to watch it is for the music. The film resonates with absolutely wonderful folk, gospel, country, and "roots" songs. I bought the soundtrack, and I listen to it often.

Link to post
Share on other sites

> {quote:title=misswonderly wrote:}{quote}

> I 've noticed a lot of people on these boards have it in for the Coen brothers. They always cite violence and swearing as two evils perpetrated by the Coens in their filmmaking.

 

We usually agree MsW, so I feel like you deserve an explanation for my posting.

 

I actually like several Cohen Bros films and the ones I didn't care for were at least worth watching once. My 82 y/o Mother adores FARGO so one night I popped in THE BIG LEBOWSKI. I thought she'd find Jeff Bridges in the grocery store wearing a robe and the Busby Berkeley hallucination sequence amusing. She was offended from the first 5 minutes in and then I began noticing how awful the dialogue is.

 

I felt badly because it would have been a great offbeat comedy she would have enjoyed, but the language really didn't further the charactor's development. Bridges played essentially the same charactor in THE FISHER KING, used the S and F word in the film, but not as nonsensically as in the Cohen Bros films.

 

I think the Cohen's are the most unusual & prolific filmmakers of our day. I only wish they would think about the big picture, the long haul of their art form and not limit themselves by poor, sloppy writing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dear MsW, you are right again. The movie rather revived the musical genre, and the soundtrack is excellent. And since we're talking, I really hate that you hate GWTW. I watch it every time it's on, and I am always so angry with Miss Scarlet at the end that I promise I won't ever watch again.. I don't know if you've ever read the book, but it's very different in many aspects from the movie. It's quite a read and very heavy in the hardback edition. I also read the sequel, which of course was nowhere near the quality, and the sequel to the movie, which of course could never touch the original. I love your honesty about what you hate, because there is a lot to hate with this movie. But there's also a lot to love. But we all know movies, like everything else, can be either an acquired taste, take it or leave it, or just a hate-it thing. You can call me Sugar any time!

 

Edited by: jbh on Mar 4, 2011 3:20 PM

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...