this film would have been MUCH better.
-
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(December 31, 2013 09:57 AM)
No, YOU missed the point. There is NO SOFTCORE ELEMENT in the film, PERIOD. It's safe to say you are NOT INFORMED enough to judge what is "softcore" and what is not. You are not informed enough to judge what is "boring", "sluggish", "too long", "lethargic", etc. and what is not. Because if you were, you would actually engage in a meaningful debate with me instead of doing all that song and dance routine the way you did before, wouldn't you?
I would think most people would know what "softcore" means, but apparently you don't. A gratuitous sex scene that serves only to TITILLATE the viewer with LENGTHY, MEANINGLESS shots that serve no purpose other than to depict sexual activities, complete with CRUDE camerawork, acting, and standard elevator music: THAT'S softcore, or to be precise, softcore PORNOGRAPHY.
The opening shower/dream scene is neither crude nor pornographic. and it actually has MEANING. AND THE MUSIC DEPICTS HER MIND STATE: from initially romantic feelings to terror later. The scene shows her being attacked when she is at her most vulnerable while her husband stands IDLY BY. It shows her AFFECTION towards her husband, who DOESN'T RECIPROCATE IT. This dream sequence is cut right to the moment when she is having unsatisfying sex with her husband. Thus, her nightmare is an APT METAPHOR for her strained relationship with her husband. HAVE YOU SEEN ANY SOFTCORE PORN FILM with such rich meaning in just one short scene?? Note that the TV version cuts out the part of her having sex with her husband, BUTCHERING THE WHOLE POINT of the scene. And here you are, telling us how much better the TV version actually is, lol.
As I said, go get some education on these EXTREMELY RUDIMENTARY topics on film art. Or keep on having an attitude and not learn a thing. -
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(December 31, 2013 03:09 PM)
moviemadness seems aptly named.
There is NO SOFTCORE ELEMENT in the film, PERIOD. It's safe to say you are NOT INFORMED enough to judge what is "softcore" and what is not.
Please stop pretending you're final judge on this, moviemadness. Many people have referred to the "softcore" flavor even if you disagree.
It's not just DTK; it was a tone which infected films, especially thrillers, in the late-'70s specifically.
No one's asking you to agree or understand it.
But don't pretend there is an objective standard for that Of course, you will, because you seem a perpetually indignant diva.
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(December 31, 2013 04:16 PM)
moviemadness seems aptly named.
It is usually when someone is losing an argument that he or she starts picking on someone's grammar or screen name, Lol. You saw how that worked out with DoctorJuliaHoffman, didn't you?
Many people have referred to the "softcore" flavor
Many people have written nonsense too. Many people have said any given movie is the worst or best film ever made. But does it mean anything? It's what YOU think and how well a particular opinion can CONVINCE people. My last post pointed out the great NARRATIVE SIGNIFICANCE of the nightmare scene to show that it is no mere softcore titillation, and I offered specifics to BACK THAT UP. What do you have? Nothing but what "other people" think?
Opinions can CHANGE over time too, and certainly "Dressed to Kill" has gained in stature in the years since it was made. "Vertigo" was once called a failure in Hitchcock's career but it is now considered by many critics to be the best film ever made:
http://explore.bfi.org.uk/sightandsoundpolls/2012
. And I've ACTUALLY seen the film and thought about it, not just hearing what "many people" said, before accepting the notion that it is indeed an all-time great film.
So enough with the glib dismissiveness that only makes your ignorance even more apparent. Try taking my advice and gain some knowledge on appreciating film aesthetics. -
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(December 31, 2013 08:27 PM)
The only thing worse than being mad as a hatter is being mad as a hatter and wildly pretentious to boot.
DTK just isn't a terribly good movie, although it has flashes of something better.
All your bluster wont change that, nor will it obscure your mania.
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 02, 2014 08:28 AM)
Everybody look at this entity who had to spend NEW YEAR'S EVE ALONE AT NIGHT writing flame post on a horror movie, Lol. The situation is simple: I made my case and pointed out specifics in the movie to support it while you and the other entity offered NOTHING but defensive attitude and are TOO UPTIGHT AND INSECURE to even admit that I made a better argument than you, let alone engage in a meaningful debate; and all your song and dance WON'T CHANGE THAT. But then again it's hard to make an argument when you are so uninformed in film art and can only rely on what "other people" say. Well, here is an info from "other people" for you, PrometheusTree64: many people at IMDb rated this film highly at 7.1.
-
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(January 02, 2014 09:25 AM)
Moviemadness,
You're arguing with us about things, in many cases, we aren't even saying. (And you keep pushing this "other people" point, as if that's what our opinions are based on).
Stop trying to use abuse and psuedo-intellectualism to force folks to say 100% positive things about a movie you happen to "like."
I mean, you come off like a crazy person!
P.S.: and thank you for being so interested in what I did or didn't do for New Year's Eve. It reveals your emotional & analytic objectivity, your lack of desperation and, hence, increases your credibility. Good job!
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 04, 2014 09:34 AM)
And picking on grammar mistakes and making fun of my user name when you are LOSING the argument is not crazy, eh? LOL. And now you pull another old trick by saying "we weren't saying that". Well, you DID say that. Again, stop weaseling your way out of a losing argument. To this point, you have not posted ONE SINGLE defense of your flawed statement, and I have cited PLENTY of specifics. Calling my statements "pseudo-intellectual" further shows the UTTERLY pathetic state of affairs regarding your film knowledge, since my statements were the MOST BASIC AND COMMON type of analysis of film, LOL! When she is attacked in her dream, her husband stands idly by outside the shower. You don't need to be Pauline Kael to notice that the dream represents what is in her mind: the strained and unloving relationship with her husband. Now stop the charade and go gain some knowledge. It's sad that you (both of you) don't have the knowledge to engage in a meaningful discussion nor the maturity to admit you are losing an argument.
-
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(January 04, 2014 02:49 PM)
"Picking on grammar mistakes"
??? (DId I?)
"Losing an argument"
?
"Now stop the charade and go gain some knowledge."
??
moviemadness, re-read your post. In fact, ALL your posts.
You are engaging is 100% projection of your own psychological issues onto others. (And people who are "winning" arguments rarely stoop to bizarre assertions about other posters' New Year's Eve activities in case you think that's a substantive argument).
You're crazy a crazy, harpy queen! Stop pretending you have some kind of imaginary upper-hand and obtain professional help.
PS: and anybody who quotes Pauline Kael is truly a lost cause. No wonder you're so pretentious.
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 04, 2014 03:49 PM)
LOLyou're doing what DoctorJuliaHoffman was doing before: ATTACKING THE POSTER INSTEAD OF COUNTERING HIS ARGUMENTS. You can't do the latter and are too immature and insecure to admit it, so you resort to do the former. Isn't it obvious?? As I said, this is a FILM forum. If you post some flawed arguments, someone will tell you WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. And if you are too stubborn to admit it, someone will also tell you that WHETHER YOU LIKE IT OR NOT. And was I "quoting" Kael? You are BARELY able to read, you know that? As I said, go get some education on A LOT of things. You just hate that I'm the one to tell you that, so don't shoot the messenger!
-
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(January 04, 2014 05:18 PM)
moviemadness,
Do you really not see what you're doing??
You keep dispensing crazed jabs about "winners" and "losers" and claiming to have made scintillating, indisputable, and thoroughly indexed points that just aren't in evidence (as well as projecting your behavior onto others e.g., "attacking the poster instead of countering his arguments").
You seem totally convinced that you're coming off well here
And my suggestion that you seek professional help was not as
attack
per se, but a recommendation.
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 05, 2014 08:01 PM)
PrometheusTree64, you've already shown you're not qualified to discuss films. Now you've shown that you're not qualified to discuss people's psychology as well, LOL. WHAT OTHER SUBJECTS DO YOU WANT TO SHOW YOUR LACK OF QUALIFICATION ABOUT, LOL? To tell people "seek professional help", I mean, aren't you embarrassed for using this age-old cliche?? ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU JUST LOST YOUR ARGUMENT? IS ADMITTING YOU'RE WRONG SOOO DIFFICULT FOR YOU?? And somehow I am the crazy one, LOL?? As I said, my arguments were just BASIC film observations; maybe to you who lack such basic knowledge, they were "scintillating" and "indisputable", LOL. And what does "coming off well" mean anyway? YOU FAILED TO RESPOND TO MY ARGUMENT and started to ATTACK ME instead, so it is YOU who are not coming off well for sure. Get it now?? There is nothing wrong here but YOUR ATTITUDE. When you couldn't respond to an argument and picked on someone's grammar, user name, and called someone crazy, that's BAD ATTITUDE. In additional to that, you have NO FILM KNOWLEDGE. NO ARGUMENTATIVE SKILLS. TOO INSECURE TO ADMIT THE ABOVE. FULL OF THE AFOREMENTIONED KINDERGARTEN TACTICS. That's just for starters.
-
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 06, 2014 01:03 PM)
As I said, you've shown that you're not qualified to discuss ANY subject matter brought up in this thread. So it's a good thing you shortened your post drastically or maybe self-realization and self-loathing is finally setting in
-
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 07, 2014 08:42 AM)
Was it my "projection" that you lack basic film knowledge, basic debating skills, maturity to admit own mistakes, make fun of grammar mistakes and user names that befit kindergarteners? See how easy it is to shoot down your arguments? See how foolish I made you look? Correction: see how you foolish YOU made yourself look?
-
PrometheusTree64 — 12 years ago(January 07, 2014 12:44 PM)
But Baby, you're
crazy!
Was it my "projection" that you lack basic film knowledge, basic debating skills, maturity to admit own mistakes, make fun of grammar mistakes and user names that befit kindergarteners?
Yes. That is your projection.
Non-sequiturs are delicious. -
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 07, 2014 02:46 PM)
Lol, you ran out of ammo long ago and now you can't even make childish comeback remarks efficiently. I made my argument about the film's artistic merit and the ball is ON YOUR COURT, but instead of responding intelligently you you actually I don't know what the HECK you are doing, LOL!! But congratulations, you are now officially even MORE BRAIN DEAD than the other entity, which I didn't think was possible. Just admit to me and everyone that you are VERY EASILY MADE UNCOMFORTABLE by someone offering you opposing arguments, ESPECIALLY ONE YOU CAN'T COUNTER, LOL. Does this happen often in REAL LIFE TOO? And lay off the computer and stop posting around the clock all over IMDb, will you? Maybe THAT'S your problem right there. Your LAST REMAINING BRAIN CELL is lacking the rest it needs so you could function like a normal human again.
-
SimplemindedSociety — 12 years ago(January 07, 2014 02:04 PM)
'and later at the pervert's apartment'
How is he a pervert? Tossing around words like "pervert" is very common,causing the real definition to lose it's meaning. If he was a pervert, then so was Kate. Naturally, we would never call a woman a pervert,though. If you thought he was perverted, you haven't seen anything.
And the reason why people cannot accept or admit being wrong is that they will wonder how many other things they are wrong about.
'wasn't so bad to endure when Kate's nightmare scene'Such an endurance test; how burdensome to have watch it. Let's really toss those extreme words around
-
moviemadness2012 — 12 years ago(January 07, 2014 02:56 PM)
Great point regarding "pervert"! But it's probably too difficult for these two posters to understand.
Great point here too: "And the reason why people cannot accept or admit being wrong is that they will wonder how many other things they are wrong about." (You see this, PrometheusTree64?) Maybe it's too difficult for them to understand this either, Lol.