Quote from: Jon on October 16, 2011, 11:42:20 AMNo, I do not consider any film with nudity to be pornography, or for that matter any film with explicit sex scenes.Funny because this is exactly what you have done here
No, I do not consider any film with nudity to be pornography, or for that matter any film with explicit sex scenes.
Quote from: Jon on October 16, 2011, 11:42:20 AMLast night I saw two or three trailers with Misty and while it is clear she is a fundamentally poor actress when compared with the Ingrid Bergmans and Grace Kellys of this world I hope you realize how this sentence is over the top... So from now on can we say that Steven spielberg is a bad director because he isn't Orson Wells or that Robert DeNiro is a bad actor because he isn't Laurence Olivier? Seriously Jon...
Last night I saw two or three trailers with Misty and while it is clear she is a fundamentally poor actress when compared with the Ingrid Bergmans and Grace Kellys of this world
I'm sure you have realized that I don't really write reviews here anymore (except for special occasion) and in the rare time I do it's a "mainstream" movie. The fact I was accused by two trolls of watching only pornographic movies, something I don't, played a large part in this decision. So no I'm not here for that anymore...
Quote from: Jon on October 16, 2011, 11:42:20 AMDo you consider "Play-mate of the Apes" and "Lord of the G-Strings" to be valuable films that have something to contribute?and the point being? Are Spiderman a film that have something to contribute? Are Texas Chainsaw Massacre a film that have something to contribute? Are Necromantik a film that have something to contribute? Are Lord of the Rings a film that have something to contribute? Who cares! If even one person is entertain by them they have contribute something.
Do you consider "Play-mate of the Apes" and "Lord of the G-Strings" to be valuable films that have something to contribute?
Wow... I am sorry I even mentioned this gift. Maybe I should have kept my mouth shut this time? To me this is nothing more then a friend giving me a gift of a few movies in a genre I am really not familiar with to check it out. So whether I enjoy them or not I will always appreciate them.But maybe I am being too simple-minded here and should be more critical? Oh well... either way I am sorry I mentioned them.
...which basically looks like ten-a-penny soft-core porn.
So now you are a porn actor if you appear naked in a movie faking sex or not? I guess Julianne Moore, Chloë Sevigny, Hilary Swank, Harvey Keitel, Marlon Brando, Nicole Kidman, Salma Hayek and a ton of other will be happy to know that...
pornographyPronunciation:/pɔːˈnɒgrəfi/noun[mass noun] printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate sexual excitement. DerivativespornographernounOrigin:mid 19th century: from Greek pornographos 'writing about prostitutes', from pornē 'prostitute' + graphein 'write'
Doesn't matter if they're really doing it. To "stimulate sexual excitement" is the point
Nice some people are sexually arouse watching animal, so now Animal Planet is a pornographic TV channel?