Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 19, 2014, 05:11:34 PM
533748 Posts in 40379 Topics by 5064 Members
Latest Member: ms liya
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  What is the most offensive film ever? « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Author Topic: What is the most offensive film ever?  (Read 13903 times)
Mofo Rising
Global Moderator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 433
Posts: 3127


My cat can eat a whole watermelon!


WWW
« Reply #120 on: September 22, 2009, 01:39:25 AM »

Anyway...

I don't get offended by subject matter of films. Well, at least not very often. I think we are at the point where we can look at media as an art, for want of a better word, that tries to say something about different aspects of life, or at least entertains. The key word is "art," and not "life itself."

That does leave two categories of film that I find possibly offensive, and they are not really related.

One, propaganda. I am going to use this definition of propaganda, which is a film that is dedicated to disseminating a certain viewpoint or argument, to the exclusion of all other concerns. Of course, all films are propagandistic to one extent or another. However, certain films are dedicated to nothing else.

So when a particular film espouses a viewpoint that I find abhorrent, yes, I will find that offensive. I realize that definition is a bit wishy-washy. What you and I may find abhorrent may differ greatly. What I mean is films that are really offensive. A good example would be a rabidly anti-semitic film, or a film dedicated to denigrating black people. You (hopefully) don't see many of these these days, but they do exist.

Note: I am not denigrating all propaganda here, just propaganda films that are just filled to the brim with hate-filled rhetoric.

The first I can give a lot of leeway to. The second I don't.

Second, when you make a film, there is a certain process you must go through. What I hate to see in any film, is the use of very young children in overwhelmingly negative situations.

For example, I watched a film called The Untold Story, a Hong Kong film about a killer who disposes of his victims by serving them up in his restaurant. The film is actually a pretty good and unflinchingly brutal story of a serial killer. However, there is a scene where the killer brutalizes an entire family, torturing them in their house. Included in that scene is a family that ranges from mother and father, through teenage kids down to toddlers. After a certain age, children can "act." However, when children are very young, say five or under, at least, there is no separation of self into make-believe. When you see a toddler crying on screen, you are seeing that child under real duress. They are not acting, they are feeling the full brunt of all their emotions. I think that putting a child under that stress, solely to make a movie, is tantamount to child abuse.

This isn't limited to obscure Asian films. Any Hollywood film that features a toddler under actual duress is guilty. The child is not "acting," they can't. They don't have that separation.

As a last aside, I've always found it amusing that filmmakers are so ready to embrace the inspirational power of their movies. If film is such a powerful medium that you can convince people to go out and do good in their lives, well, it follows that films must have the same inspirational power to convince people to go out and do very nasty things. You can't have one without the other.

And, yes, I am a very big proponent of the government keeping their hands off "art." I'm also a very big proponent of private institutions being able to say "no thanks" to films they don't agree with. It is not the same thing.
Logged

Every dead body that is not exterminated becomes one of them. It gets up and kills. The people it kills, get up and kill.
Skull
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 103
Posts: 1466



« Reply #121 on: September 22, 2009, 06:31:14 AM »

Im very sorry for derailing this tread...

Rev. Powell when/or if you do please post me a link... :)

ghouck, I disagree because I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given. Although I would love to talk more on the subject but I do think we need to go on another thread. If you happen to start a new thread on the subject please post me the link... :)
Logged

I'm raised by a wild pack of jerks...


Skull
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 103
Posts: 1466



« Reply #122 on: September 22, 2009, 06:45:00 AM »

Anyway...

I don't get offended by subject matter of films. Well, at least not very often. I think we are at the point where we can look at media as an art, for want of a better word, that tries to say something about different aspects of life, or at least entertains. The key word is "art," and not "life itself."

That does leave two categories of film that I find possibly offensive, and they are not really related.

One, propaganda. I am going to use this definition of propaganda, which is a film that is dedicated to disseminating a certain viewpoint or argument, to the exclusion of all other concerns. Of course, all films are propagandistic to one extent or another. However, certain films are dedicated to nothing else.

So when a particular film espouses a viewpoint that I find abhorrent, yes, I will find that offensive. I realize that definition is a bit wishy-washy. What you and I may find abhorrent may differ greatly. What I mean is films that are really offensive. A good example would be a rabidly anti-semitic film, or a film dedicated to denigrating black people. You (hopefully) don't see many of these these days, but they do exist.

Note: I am not denigrating all propaganda here, just propaganda films that are just filled to the brim with hate-filled rhetoric.

The first I can give a lot of leeway to. The second I don't.

Second, when you make a film, there is a certain process you must go through. What I hate to see in any film, is the use of very young children in overwhelmingly negative situations.

For example, I watched a film called The Untold Story, a Hong Kong film about a killer who disposes of his victims by serving them up in his restaurant. The film is actually a pretty good and unflinchingly brutal story of a serial killer. However, there is a scene where the killer brutalizes an entire family, torturing them in their house. Included in that scene is a family that ranges from mother and father, through teenage kids down to toddlers. After a certain age, children can "act." However, when children are very young, say five or under, at least, there is no separation of self into make-believe. When you see a toddler crying on screen, you are seeing that child under real duress. They are not acting, they are feeling the full brunt of all their emotions. I think that putting a child under that stress, solely to make a movie, is tantamount to child abuse.

This isn't limited to obscure Asian films. Any Hollywood film that features a toddler under actual duress is guilty. The child is not "acting," they can't. They don't have that separation.

As a last aside, I've always found it amusing that filmmakers are so ready to embrace the inspirational power of their movies. If film is such a powerful medium that you can convince people to go out and do good in their lives, well, it follows that films must have the same inspirational power to convince people to go out and do very nasty things. You can't have one without the other.

And, yes, I am a very big proponent of the government keeping their hands off "art." I'm also a very big proponent of private institutions being able to say "no thanks" to films they don't agree with. It is not the same thing.



I think there is a ton of laws in America that actually protect the children in films... I do understand its important for Hollywood to find identical twins to play toddlers because they have a short filming time (although I could see and understand the use of CGI for small children here)


As for other countries the rules are different...



Can the child act... I actually think they can... the beauty of film is you can shoot a scene for weeks and edit all the good parts to make the scene work... :)

Logged

I'm raised by a wild pack of jerks...


ghouck
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 583
Posts: 3750


Afro-Mullets RULE!


WWW
« Reply #123 on: September 22, 2009, 10:12:00 AM »

Im very sorry for derailing this tread...

Rev. Powell when/or if you do please post me a link... :)

ghouck, I disagree because I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given. Although I would love to talk more on the subject but I do think we need to go on another thread. If you happen to start a new thread on the subject please post me the link... :)

You start a thread if you want, I'm too lazy. . .
Logged

Raw bacon is GREAT! It's like regular bacon, only faster, and it doesn't burn the roof of your mouth!

Happiness is green text in the "Stuff To Watch For" section.

James James: The man so nice, they named him twice.

"Aw man, this thong is chafing my balls" -Lloyd Kaufman in Poultrygeist.

"There's always time for lubricant" -Orlando Jones in Evolution
Doggett
Bustin' makes me feel good !
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 967
Posts: 8391


I've seen things you people couldn't imagine...


WWW
« Reply #124 on: September 22, 2009, 10:27:13 AM »


 I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given.

I personally believe that we should all have x ray vision !

Oh, I'm sorry.
Am I living in fantasy land ?


Well, that makes two of us.

There will always be idiots which is why laws, even if they seem blindingly obvious, are needed.
Logged

                                             

If God exists, why did he make me an atheist? Thats His first mistake.
Skull
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 103
Posts: 1466



« Reply #125 on: September 22, 2009, 10:44:10 AM »


 I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given.


I personally believe that we should all have x ray vision !

Oh, I'm sorry.
Am I living in fantasy land ?


Well, that makes two of us.

There will always be idiots which is why laws, even if they seem blindingly obvious, are needed.




hehe... I wouldnt want x-ray vision... Some of these people do not look good naked... :)



(just a random pic)


Yes there is idiots...  and it doesnt matter what law you write, an idiot will still be an idiot. Idiots dont follow the laws, they live in their own little world and expect that the world rotates arround them, if an idiot did follow the laws (or the rules of the road) the texting topic wouldnt be an issue.

[Ill be happy to post more about the topic but the off-topic issues should be on another post, this is my last time Ill add to the off-topic issue...]

Logged

I'm raised by a wild pack of jerks...


ghouck
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 583
Posts: 3750


Afro-Mullets RULE!


WWW
« Reply #126 on: September 22, 2009, 10:56:57 AM »


Yes there is idiots...  and it doesnt matter what law you write, an idiot will still be an idiot. Idiots dont follow the laws, they live in their own little world and expect that the world rotates arround


Yep, , you're right. Those are the same idiots that you feel don't need to be told that texting while driving or driving drunk is dangerous. You are right, people SHOULD be responsible for themselves, but they aren't, and because of that, people die. Only a fool would base their laws on how the world SHOULD be and not on how it actually IS. With that mentality, we should just abandon all laws because people 'should' do what's right all around.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2009, 12:10:50 PM by ghouck » Logged

Raw bacon is GREAT! It's like regular bacon, only faster, and it doesn't burn the roof of your mouth!

Happiness is green text in the "Stuff To Watch For" section.

James James: The man so nice, they named him twice.

"Aw man, this thong is chafing my balls" -Lloyd Kaufman in Poultrygeist.

"There's always time for lubricant" -Orlando Jones in Evolution
Doggett
Bustin' makes me feel good !
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 967
Posts: 8391


I've seen things you people couldn't imagine...


WWW
« Reply #127 on: September 22, 2009, 11:58:14 AM »



 I disagree because I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given.

You don't get the money back if they don't make new laws, you know that right ?
It's not like your taxes will go down. The money will probably be spent on something that you'd like even less.
Logged

                                             

If God exists, why did he make me an atheist? Thats His first mistake.
Skull
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 103
Posts: 1466



« Reply #128 on: September 22, 2009, 12:23:02 PM »

hehe... I love you guys... TeddyR (Good Issues wrong topic)




I disagree because I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given.

You don't get the money back if they don't make new laws, you know that right ?
It's not like your taxes will go down. The money will probably be spent on something that you'd like even less.

True... but there is no need for government to ask for MORE money... if they can use the money that they already had efficiently.



Quote
Yep, , you're right. Those are the same idiots that you feel don't need to be told that texting while driving or driving drunk is dangerous. You are right, people SHOULD be responsible for themselves, but they aren't, and because of the people die.

A sad reality... but we have laws and jail, and if the idiot spends enough time in jail maybe they will learn "responsibility."

Quote
Only a fool would base their laws on how the world SHOULD be and not on how it actually IS. With that mentality, we should just abandon all laws because people 'should' do what's right all around. ~ ghouck

Im not suggesting to toss out the laws... Reckless Driving covers everything from drinking, texting, tieing my shoes, driving with my hands on the gas petal, driving blindfolded, driving while brushing my teeth, surfing the internet while driving, etc, etc, etc... Reckless Driving is what it is.

I was using the Ban of Texting while Driving as an example of Cheap Politics.

Logged

I'm raised by a wild pack of jerks...


Doggett
Bustin' makes me feel good !
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 967
Posts: 8391


I've seen things you people couldn't imagine...


WWW
« Reply #129 on: September 22, 2009, 12:27:05 PM »

hehe... I love you guys... TeddyR (Good Issues wrong topic)




I disagree because I personally believe that we should all be responsable for our actions and we dont need government (spending our tax dollars) in writing laws that should be a given.

You don't get the money back if they don't make new laws, you know that right ?
It's not like your taxes will go down. The money will probably be spent on something that you'd like even less.

True... but there is no need for government to ask for MORE money... if they can use the money that they already had efficiently.


You have a government that can't efficiently spend it's tax money ?
That's true of every country on the planet ?!?!?!

There's no point in moaning about that.  Lookingup
Logged

                                             

If God exists, why did he make me an atheist? Thats His first mistake.
Javakoala
Unsung Hero Of The Whimpering Trilobites
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 115
Posts: 2674



WWW
« Reply #130 on: September 22, 2009, 01:35:25 PM »

I like kitty-cats.  I can pet them all day long.


Wait, sorry.  Wrong website.
Logged

I have been told that I crap on everything everyone else loves. Just be thankful I can't give you an Oklahoma Nipple Twist through the Internet.
ghouck
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 583
Posts: 3750


Afro-Mullets RULE!


WWW
« Reply #131 on: September 22, 2009, 01:48:54 PM »


A sad reality... but we have laws and jail, and if the idiot spends enough time in jail maybe they will learn "responsibility."

First, they don't. But even if they did, with YOUR model, a person has to get hurt before they are punished, with laws prohibiting things like Texting while driving, we don't wait for that. SO, rather than waiting for someone to get hurt to prove to some idiot that texting while driving is dangerous, why don't we just outlaw that dangerous behavior in the first place.

Quote
Only a fool would base their laws on how the world SHOULD be and not on how it actually IS. With that mentality, we should just abandon all laws because people 'should' do what's right all around. ~ ghouck

Im not suggesting to toss out the laws... Reckless Driving covers everything from drinking, texting, tieing my shoes, driving with my hands on the gas petal, driving blindfolded, driving while brushing my teeth, surfing the internet while driving, etc, etc, etc... Reckless Driving is what it is.

I was using the Ban of Texting while Driving as an example of Cheap Politics.


"Reckless Driving is what it is", , but, "I like the idea of wiggle room" is what you said before. It can't be both ways, and no, reckless driving laws have not sufficiently covered it, not by a long stretch. People have routinely applied makeup, read the newspaper, eaten lunch, all sorts of things and gotten away with it because it couldn't be PROVEN that it was reckless for them to do so.

As for drunk driving, you're wrong there also. There was a guy up here that got arrested for DWI, but for some reason they only charged him with reckless driving. He got away with it because he had tons of witnesses that testified that he drove drunk almost every day for 25 years, and had not gotten into a wreck yet, therefor he wasn't being reckless. Right now he's working in my sanding room.

Regardless, the entire point of the law is that, as I stated before, there is an expected level of competency, certain requirements for you to be on the road. Just the same as you have to have headlights that work, tires that meet certain criteria, a horn that works, a windshield you can see out of, and a host of other things, you have to be skilled to some degree (pass a test), responsible to some degree (insured), able to some degree (be able to actually operate the vehicle), you have to be sober (BAC less than 0.8%), and able to pay a certain degree of attention (not be distracted). It's actually pretty simple.
Logged

Raw bacon is GREAT! It's like regular bacon, only faster, and it doesn't burn the roof of your mouth!

Happiness is green text in the "Stuff To Watch For" section.

James James: The man so nice, they named him twice.

"Aw man, this thong is chafing my balls" -Lloyd Kaufman in Poultrygeist.

"There's always time for lubricant" -Orlando Jones in Evolution
Psycho Circus
B-Movie Kraken
*****

Karma: 1529
Posts: 12052


Shake The Faith


WWW
« Reply #132 on: September 22, 2009, 03:04:23 PM »

Tax dollars? Kitty cats? Windshields? How is this thread carrying on!?  Buggedout
Logged

Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 237
Posts: 2944



« Reply #133 on: September 22, 2009, 03:29:04 PM »

Quote
For example, I watched a film called The Untold Story, a Hong Kong film about a killer who disposes of his victims by serving them up in his restaurant. The film is actually a pretty good and unflinchingly brutal story of a serial killer. However, there is a scene where the killer brutalizes an entire family, torturing them in their house. Included in that scene is a family that ranges from mother and father, through teenage kids down to toddlers.


While I think by and large you're probably right about how they got those kids to act (though I personally know 4 and 5 year old kids who can cry and act scared on demand - they do it to manipulate their parents), I remember seeing Anthony Wong (who plays the killer in that film) talking about how in a scene where you see the severed young kids heads laying about, they kept ruining the shot.  You see, the kids were under platforms with their heads sticking out, etc, and they kept sticking their tongue out at Anthony Wong and making faces, cracking him up and ruining the shot.  So, it may not be quite as bad as it initially seems.

Speaking of the treatment of kids in HK films..

Small | Large
Logged
ghouck
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 583
Posts: 3750


Afro-Mullets RULE!


WWW
« Reply #134 on: September 22, 2009, 03:30:58 PM »

Tax dollars? Kitty cats? Windshields? How is this thread carrying on!?  Buggedout

Sea Kitty cats or the regular ones?
Logged

Raw bacon is GREAT! It's like regular bacon, only faster, and it doesn't burn the roof of your mouth!

Happiness is green text in the "Stuff To Watch For" section.

James James: The man so nice, they named him twice.

"Aw man, this thong is chafing my balls" -Lloyd Kaufman in Poultrygeist.

"There's always time for lubricant" -Orlando Jones in Evolution
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  What is the most offensive film ever? « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.