OT: The Movies Thread

[nuraman00]

In order of what I quoted.

Of course, he had an erection, didn't you? Ariel is hot. If her father is turned on now, imagine, he had to fight that for years. Oh, that's a bad thing for a father to say. I'm only kidding. I assume she's old enough for marriage, so she's legal... just not for her father.

You should definitely see "Who Framed Roger Rabbit" and "The Rescuers", in that order, not necessarily consecutively.

Going off-topic, but it's also possible to get erections when not aroused. Sometimes it just happens.

This reminds me of a scene from the TV show Roseanne, where one of the kids was embarrassed because he kept getting them in class. He was so embarrassed that he didn't want to volunteer to go up to the chalkboard anymore, because he didn't want people looking at him when he walked.

One of the parents suggested to "put a book in front of it" (when he was seated).

 

[MHSL82]

Going off-topic, but it's also possible to get erections when not aroused. Sometimes it just happens.

This reminds me of a scene from the TV show Roseanne, where one of the kids was embarrassed because he kept getting them in class. He was so embarrassed that he didn't want to volunteer to go up to the chalkboard anymore, because he didn't want people looking at him when he walked.

One of the parents suggested to "put a book in front of it" (when he was seated).

I'm a guy, so yes, I know. I can sadly relate. Not particularly, just normal for a guy. I won't go into detail on examples because that's awkward.

 

[MHSL82]

I meant it sounded like "take off your blouse" rather than "take off your clothes". Not that one was better than the other.

But, I also meant that as long as they didn't show anything, which they didn't, then the quick, hard-to-hear audible phrases weren't any worse than the bathroom humor that is in some kids' movies anyways. Or scenes where someone accidentally walks in on someone changing/showering.

While this wasn't a Disney movie, it was a Dreamworks movie, but in one of the Shrek movies, the Donkey pulls the covers off Shrek's bed. Off-screen, he then suggests to Shrek that he get new pajamas. (It was implied that Shrek at least must have had holes in his clothing, or slept semi or fully nude).

That's the same sort of humor in another kids' movie as these 1 second sound bites from Aladdin.

And in all of these cases, the questionable moments occur off-screen, you only hear a reaction to it.

Or in Jasmine's case from Aladdin, maybe she accidentally walked in on someone changing.

Examples like the Shrek implication works because for kids, merely being naked is funny. They don't see the sexual part of it - especially between two beasts/animals/whatever.

I think the subliminal messages are interesting, I just don't like those who preach about it. Disney is made up of a vast diversity of people, some do prank under their bosses eyes. Some bosses don't see everything despite looking at it a lot in editing. They can't be looking for continuity, plot-line, characters consistency, audience approval, and everything else like could this be seen dirty? It's like those who say the government should know when someone somewhere is going to something to someone using something that may be an automobile, bomb, plane, or other weapon. But then, say no peaking! This is not political, as I'd defend either party if I felt they missed something that is not practically preventable. I care about the response and the attempt to protect.

Got sidetracked, meant to just say that Disney can still be a good company despite making money and despite these messages, true or not.

Have you seen the Paul is Dead theories? The claim is that Paul McCartney, a member of the Beatles, died in a car crash near the height of their run, was replaced by a look-alike, and they put in a bunch of clues in their albums and songs.

Here's an introduction, you can proceed from there if it interests you.


Examples and explanations:

 

[nuraman00]

I'm a guy, so yes, I know. I can sadly relate. Not particularly, just normal for a guy. I won't go into detail on examples because that's awkward.

You like awkward humor though.

 

[nuraman00]

Examples like the Shrek implication works because for kids, merely being naked is funny. They don't see the sexual part of it - especially between two beasts/animals/whatever.

I think the subliminal messages are interesting, I just don't like those who preach about it. Disney is made up of a vast diversity of people, some do prank under their bosses eyes. Some bosses don't see everything despite looking at it a lot in editing. They can't be looking for continuity, plot-line, characters consistency, audience approval, and everything else like could this be seen dirty? It's like those who say the government should know when someone somewhere is going to something to someone using something that may be an automobile, bomb, plane, or other weapon. But then, say no peaking! This is not political, as I'd defend either party if I felt they missed something that is not practically preventable. I care about the response and the attempt to protect.

Got sidetracked, meant to just say that Disney can still be a good company despite making money and despite these messages, true or not.

Have you seen the Paul is Dead theories? The claim is that Paul McCartney, a member of the Beatles, died in a car crash near the height of their run, was replaced by a look-alike, and they put in a bunch of clues in their albums and songs.

Here's an introduction, you can proceed from there if it interests you.


Examples and explanations:

Thanks, I'll look at this later.

 

[nuraman00]

Examples like the Shrek implication works because for kids, merely being naked is funny. They don't see the sexual part of it - especially between two beasts/animals/whatever.

I think the subliminal messages are interesting, I just don't like those who preach about it. Disney is made up of a vast diversity of people, some do prank under their bosses eyes. Some bosses don't see everything despite looking at it a lot in editing. They can't be looking for continuity, plot-line, characters consistency, audience approval, and everything else like could this be seen dirty? It's like those who say the government should know when someone somewhere is going to something to someone using something that may be an automobile, bomb, plane, or other weapon. But then, say no peaking! This is not political, as I'd defend either party if I felt they missed something that is not practically preventable. I care about the response and the attempt to protect.

Agree.

I also just think that because these are subliminal messages, and because they're not overt (at least IMO), then it's not a big deal either way. And because the kids won't get them anyways.

Commercials for Viagra or Cialus, or even some Carls Jr. or Taco Bell commercials (in which they've sold sex as a part of advertising) are worse. But some kids won't get them anyways.

The latter examples are more overt than some subliminal 1 second thing in a movie.

 

[MHSL82]

Agree.

I also just think that because these are subliminal messages, and because they're not overt (at least IMO), then it's not a big deal either way. And because the kids won't get them anyways.

Commercials for Viagra or Cialus, or even some Carls Jr. or Taco Bell commercials (in which they've sold sex as a part of advertising) are worse. But some kids won't get them anyways.

The latter examples are more overt than some subliminal 1 second thing in a movie.

The idea and outrage by some (over-reaction and the urge to call big Disney hypocritical) is that these subliminal images subconsciously teach kids things that they don't even know they saw.

In my attempt to comment Nuraman-Style - it just said the word "sex" - it didn't say it was good or bad or to do it. They don't know what sex is and they won't subconsciously remember it later and do it because now they think Disney endorses it. They could simply just think about "gender." Plus, it looks like it says "set" which doesn't really mean anything.

 

[nuraman00]

The idea and outrage by some (over-reaction and the urge to call big Disney hypocritical) is that these subliminal images subconsciously teach kids things that they don't even know they saw.

In my attempt to comment Nuraman-Style - it just said the word "sex" - it didn't say it was good or bad or to do it. They don't know what sex is and they won't subconsciously remember it later and do it because now they think Disney endorses it. They could simply just think about "gender." Plus, it looks like it says "set" which doesn't really mean anything.

 

[MHSL82]

On second thought, maybe the word "set" encourages them to "set their school on fire?" Maybe sex was preferred. Yes, sex is always preferred. Oops, slipped back into MHSL82. Again, I'm not a pervert, I just play one on TV, I mean, message boards.

Yes, I recycle lame jokes as well as good ones, got a problem with that? At least I don't steal them like Dane Cook. I can't find the good youtube video of this, but here's this as a substitute.

[YOUTUBE]-xP-m4tE4ys[/YOUTUBE]

 

[nuraman00]

I think the subliminal messages are interesting,

Do you think they are bad?

 

[MHSL82]

Do you think they are bad?

Depends on what they are an how subliminal they are. My brother in elementary school did a science project on subliminal messages. Some were more effective than others, some more with certain ages. All tested in the same environment, same video. So if it were something like "kill your mother, she's a ****" it would bug me - it would also be more obvious, probably (since it is longer and may need more time to be effective). Plus, those can't be explained away, unless it sounded more like, "Jill your mother she's real fun." And if it were presented in the way that my brother showed to be effective, then yes. But "sex" in leaves, no. I regret that I don't remember what the findings were. I wouldn't rely on an elementary study too much, though, no matter how smart my brother is/was.

 

[nuraman00]

Depends on what they are an how subliminal they are. My brother in elementary school did a science project on subliminal messages. Some were more effective than others, some more with certain ages. All tested in the same environment, same video. So if it were something like "kill your mother, she's a ****" it would bug me - it would also be more obvious, probably (since it is longer and may need more time to be effective). Plus, those can't be explained away, unless it sounded more like, "Jill your mother she's real fun." And if it were presented in the way that my brother showed to be effective, then yes. But "sex" in leaves, no. I regret that I don't remember what the findings were. I wouldn't rely on an elementary study too much, though, no matter how smart my brother is/was.

Thanks.

I agree, your example is worse.

 

[nuraman00]

One thing I prefer about Chase's acting in this movie (resuming now) over others, is that he's not over-the-top like Ferrell, or Carey. The latter can still be good, but Chase's style is subtler, and I like that a little more.

Norm MacDonald is another guy I liked.

Chase's character isn't an overtly weird character, it just sneaks up on you and you notice it more as the movie progresses.

 

[nuraman00]

I guess here's the difference. If I hear about a movie with Robin Williams, Jim Carey, Adam Sandler, or Will Ferrell, or Rob Lowe, I'll initially be reluctant. But after I watch it, it will sometimes be better than I thought.

When I hear about a Chase movie, I don't have that initial reservation.

 

[MHSL82]

I guess here's the difference. If I hear about a movie with Robin Williams, Jim Carey, Adam Sandler, or Will Ferrell, or Rob Lowe, I'll initially be reluctant. But after I watch it, it will sometimes be better than I thought.

When I hear about a Chase movie, I don't have that initial reservation.

It's really hard sometimes, but I enjoy movies more if I'm not thinking about who the actor is. Just the character. The more wild they are, the worse it is for me - not in humor, but in getting into the movie. I can't think of any examples, but that's the way I look at it.

My favorite actor and comedian is Steve Martin, though I like his older movies better than new and definitely more than remakes. I can't guess on whether you like him, don't know him well, or don't like him. I could honestly see either way. I could see you not liking the Pink Panther with him, but liking the Hamburger scene. I could also see you never seeing the movie before. If you like Chevy Chase, I'd guess you'd like Steve Martin a bit, at least in Three Amigos - but I could also see you thinking that's something others got into but not you.

Hard to guess, unpredictable sometimes; that's a good thing, right? Maybe I'm just a bad guesser.

 

[MHSL82]

 

[nuraman00]

"Christmas Vacation" has a scene where "It's A Wonderful Life" is in the background.

 

[nuraman00]

It's really hard sometimes, but I enjoy movies more if I'm not thinking about who the actor is. Just the character. The more wild they are, the worse it is for me - not in humor, but in getting into the movie. I can't think of any examples, but that's the way I look at it.

My favorite actor and comedian is Steve Martin, though I like his older movies better than new and definitely more than remakes. I can't guess on whether you like him, don't know him well, or don't like him. I could honestly see either way. I could see you not liking the Pink Panther with him, but liking the Hamburger scene. I could also see you never seeing the movie before. If you like Chevy Chase, I'd guess you'd like Steve Martin a bit, at least in Three Amigos - but I could also see you thinking that's something others got into but not you.

Hard to guess, unpredictable sometimes; that's a good thing, right? Maybe I'm just a bad guesser.

I don't watch a lot of comedies, so I've only seen 2-3 movies by most of these guys anyways. So I can't really say if I like someone, until I've seen 4-6 movies IMO.

Yeah, your description of a "wild character" is what I meant. I didn't mean to pin it on an actor, but rather the character. I agree, it's usually harder for me to get into wild characters.

Side note - I have seen Robin Williams do stand-up live. He was good. But stand-up is different than movies.

As for Steve Martin, I've seen Roxanne. That's it. Never seen the Father Of The Bride movies, although I wanted to. Roxanne was ok, worth watching once, but that's about it. I wouldn't talk about it.


As for Chase, this is only my 3rd Chase movie, and first since Dirty Work in 1998, so it's been a while. And I'm sure my tastes have changed too. And I don't have much exposure to him either.

 

[MHSL82]

I don't watch a lot of comedies, so I've only seen 2-3 movies by most of these guys anyways. So I can't really say if I like someone, until I've seen 4-6 movies IMO.

Yeah, your description of a "wild character" is what I meant. I didn't mean to pin it on an actor, but rather the character. I agree, it's usually harder for me to get into wild characters.

Side note - I have seen Robin Williams do stand-up live. He was good. But stand-up is different than movies.

As for Steve Martin, I've seen Roxanne. That's it. Never seen the Father Of The Bride movies, although I wanted to. Roxanne was ok, worth watching once, but that's about it. I wouldn't talk about it.


As for Chase, this is only my 3rd Chase movie, and first since Dirty Work in 1998, so it's been a while. And I'm sure my tastes have changed too. And I don't have much exposure to him either.

You should see Little Shop of Horrors, just as a classic. But here's a scene I love. No, this is not for kids.

[YOUTUBE]KJ-6TCPdbl0[/YOUTUBE]

 

[nuraman00]

You should see Little Shop of Horrors, just as a classic. But here's a scene I love. No, this is not for kids.

[YOUTUBE]KJ-6TCPdbl0[/YOUTUBE]

That was ok.

I liked him squirting water into the mouth into the patient from a distance, the last 15-20 seconds, and then the patient spitting.