Anyone else DEEPLY disturbed by the bashing of the Japaense guy?
-
skarnason — 19 years ago(May 20, 2006 04:15 PM)
he may not have knew that they they were mafioso's but he still knew the risks involved so its his own fault. lol. love the scene rewind it at least 3 times. donnie brasco kicks ass!!
Why does everyone keep repeating the birthday joke? -
lesdroits — 14 years ago(September 25, 2011 05:44 PM)
DeppheadI'm with you. Some of these posters, like Snarkynason or whatever, the ones talking about rewinding and all, are genuinely scary like the people who applauded that 250 or so people were executed under Perry during Republican debate. Applaud? No soul. Empty zombies. Lord of the flies.
I have to hope they are only writing this to be controversial and don't mean it.
BUT apart from the politics of it I thought the scene had a role to play. -
silicondoc — 19 years ago(June 02, 2006 10:25 PM)
by - depphead12 on Sat May 6 2006 17:45:50
-I agree with the first poster.
That scene was revolting.
First, how can you approve a group of guys beating severely an innocent man who was trying to do his job ?
Michelle, you have here mostly a bunch of fantasy weenies whom can't be and aren't mafioso hit men in their real lives so they get a big thrill cheery claiming they love the TV violence. It merely plays out their their unused hormonal imbalances more commonly known as the disease of being a male. Better yet, when they get a real touchy feely person and especially a chicakadee complaining about it, it only drives the fantasy into deeper hyper teeniebopper mode.
Rest assured most of them would stand on the dime and wet their drawers as they got the crap beat out of them by the real thing. Until that unlikely day they can all pretend they're all for it.
It's like the pc race whiners only opposite. Those types can't wait to dive like ravenous beast from the netherworld upon the hapless blokester whom dares to let out a peeping hint that might in fact have some problem with skin colors not their own. Doesn't matter if they really do or not, and it doesn't matter if they're three shades of green in real life and were scalped by a nazi skinhead as a pre-teen.
It just "works" to be the purist shining halo of pc purity and wholeness and love for humanity if you do a frontal lobototomy on the "suspected vermin racist". That way the personal purity and self esteem can get a big fat online rise going, which is some other form of chemical hormonal lift- akin to the played out steriodal love of a good beating seen on the tube.
Then of course there are those that will chime in with overtly racist text if only to shutup the pc race policers or get a rise out of them, either way that's another hip mode of exchange.
It didn't appear to me by your text that you were being disingenuous nor am I saying specifically anyone else was. I just wanted to relate to you my interpretation of the likely outcome if real life situations arise. In other words, what everyone says is not neccessarily what everyone would do, and it is more likely that there are larger differences in that than similarities.
Unless one has personal experiences, it is never certain what the actual reaction may be. A bad mood or a good mood, a bit of anger or frustration or an elation due to a new trinket- and the reaction to a real life situation could all go a different way for anyone. What is said about it can be somewhat taken for what it is- talk.
I don't think people should be surprised about any reaction, pro or con- good or bad- like dislike - racist or not - people do have different personalities and experiences in life and certainly those do some sort of guiding upon what they text and how they interpret - and perhaps the viewpoint is just as valid as the next even if it is commonly given a thumbs down by another.
Did you grow up in Beverly Hills or Middle america or on the street or in the hood or in the jungles of South America or on your aun'ts farm or in the household of a crime family ? It all makes a difference, even if the actions of all still are bound to the circumstances of consequences. -
Frank-copeland — 19 years ago(December 12, 2006 11:17 PM)
I worked at a couple of places in Boston in the late '90s that were frequented by some people that were pretty obviously connected. When you live and work in an environment that has dangerous people, you need to learn when to stand your ground, and when to back down. Starting an intimidation game with obviously dangerous people is just a bad move. Especially over something as minor as foorwear. The scene was disturbing to me, but it made sense in the context, and was there for a reason. To the first poster, it's a good thing to be disturbed by that level of unnecessary violence.
I just thought I'd chime in, as someone who has been in similar situations, I just put my priorities in a different order than the character of the waiter did.
Words and stuff,
Big Frankie C
www.myspace.com/BigFrankieC -
montrossboc-1 — 9 years ago(July 20, 2016 01:49 PM)
It was just a scene that is supposed to show how far Donnie would go to protect his cover. Once the first punch was thrown, that's exactly the beating would have gone down.
And remember, it's just a movie.
Short Cut, Draw Blood -
-
Kotkijet — 19 years ago(May 10, 2006 06:56 AM)
The scene didn't disturb me at all. I thought it was hilarious, largely because it was such a ridiculous scenario. (beating some waiter up over shoes, not the actual reason - the wire)
All in all, I saw it as good art. Some actor pretending to be beaten by a group of actors.
However, I can completely sympathise with those who were disturbed because it's understandable feeling uneasy if one put oneself in the waiter's shoes and went over and over the emotions the poor lad was feeling. -
quebecstation — 19 years ago(May 12, 2006 06:13 AM)
I just watched it for the second time,and I have to admit,this scene really did disturb me.I think it's the noises the waiter makes as he's being beaten - which is obviously what was intended,as the following scene is of Donnie/Joe listening to his tape recording of the beating.I don't think the waiter was out of line at all and definitely didn't deserve that.The whole point of the scene is that Donnie is upset by it and the fact that this poor guy had to suffer that because of him.
-
quebecstation — 19 years ago(May 13, 2006 02:18 PM)
The waiter didn't ask for it.He was just doing his job.Realistically,the most that any normal person would do is get into an argument or leave the restaurant but the point is to show the gangsters believe themselves to be superior to everyone else and think they can get away with anything.