Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Seth MacFarlane on Oscar Night
48 views
Skip to first unread message
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 1:22:59 PM3/17/13
to
The producers of the Oscars broadcast say that the audience didn't
understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
tastelessness of his song.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_2895591.html
I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
lot tamer.
I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
--
"Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
tastelessness of his song.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_2895591.html
I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
lot tamer.
I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
--
"Big Wheel Keep on Turnin'" -- Creedence Clearwater Revival
David J. Martin
Mar 17, 2013, 1:37:10 PM3/17/13
to
was a case of "aren't you glad I wasn't that tasteless" while actually
being that tasteless.
David.
Lesmond
Mar 17, 2013, 3:23:21 PM3/17/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 12:22:59 -0500, M C Hamster wrote:
>The producers of the Oscars broadcast say that the audience didn't
>understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
>demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
>tastelessness of his song.
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_2895591.html
>
>I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
>that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
>terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
>and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
>performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
>
>I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
>it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
>The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
>lot tamer.
>
>I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
>don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
>to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
>is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
The setup was perfectly clear. And I thought the song was hilarious.
>The producers of the Oscars broadcast say that the audience didn't
>understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
>demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
>tastelessness of his song.
>
>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_2895591.html
>
>I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
>that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
>terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
>and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
>performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
>
>I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
>it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
>The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
>lot tamer.
>
>I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
>don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
>to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
>is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.
D.F. Manno
Mar 17, 2013, 2:36:50 PM3/17/13
to
In article <qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com>,
2) Brooks has explained the reasoning behind "The Producers" repeatedly:
"You make your enemy look ridiculous, you've won, and the best way to do
that is with wit. Wit is sharper than the sharpest dagger." Again, so
far as we know, McFarlane's purpose wasn't remotely as high-minded.
C) McFarlane should get a pass for being an asshole because he
telegraphed that he was going to be an asshole?
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
> The producers of the Oscars broadcast say that the audience didn't
> understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
> demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
> tastelessness of his song.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_289
> 5591.html
>
> I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
> that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
> terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
> and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
> performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
>
> I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
> it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
> The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
> lot tamer.
>
> I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
> don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
> to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
> is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
1) Brooks is Jewish. McFarlane, so far as we know, is not a woman.
> understand the song "I Saw Your Boobs" was satirical and meant not to
> demean the actresses, but to demean MacFarlane for the extreme
> tastelessness of his song.
>
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/17/oscar-producers-seth-macfarlane_n_289
> 5591.html
>
> I did not watch the Oscars show. But as I understand it, the setup was
> that a from-the-future William Shatner was telling MacFarlane what a
> terrible, horrible job he had done hosting the Oscars back in 2013,
> and Shatner said "... like remember that song and dance number you
> performed?" And then it cut to the "I Saw Your Boobs" song.
>
> I finally watched the video of the song, and with that setup, I found
> it fairly funny. I mean, it was much like "Springtime for Hitler" in
> The Producers, given that sort of setup. But "I Saw Your Boobs" is a
> lot tamer.
>
> I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
> don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
> to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
> is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
2) Brooks has explained the reasoning behind "The Producers" repeatedly:
"You make your enemy look ridiculous, you've won, and the best way to do
that is with wit. Wit is sharper than the sharpest dagger." Again, so
far as we know, McFarlane's purpose wasn't remotely as high-minded.
C) McFarlane should get a pass for being an asshole because he
telegraphed that he was going to be an asshole?
--
D.F. Manno | dfm...@mail.com
GOP delenda est!
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 17, 2013, 2:59:56 PM3/17/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 17:37:10 +0000 (UTC), David J. Martin
<djmarti...@tamu.edu> wrote:
>
>I watched it live. I got the set-up. It didn't work for me. I thought it
>was a case of "aren't you glad I wasn't that tasteless" while actually
>being that tasteless.
>
>David.
'Zackly
<djmarti...@tamu.edu> wrote:
>
>I watched it live. I got the set-up. It didn't work for me. I thought it
>was a case of "aren't you glad I wasn't that tasteless" while actually
>being that tasteless.
>
>David.
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 17, 2013, 3:00:16 PM3/17/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 14:36:50 -0400, "D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com>
wrote:
>
>C) McFarlane should get a pass for being an asshole because he
>telegraphed that he was going to be an asshole?
'Zackly
wrote:
>
>C) McFarlane should get a pass for being an asshole because he
>telegraphed that he was going to be an asshole?
Les Albert
Mar 17, 2013, 3:04:30 PM3/17/13
to
1942 comedy, "To Be Or Not To Be", with Jack Benny. Here is a funny
scene with Benny pretending to be a nazi party member so he can get
his acting troupe out of Warsaw after the Germans took over:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zpgjyn7dgk
Les
Dover Beach
Mar 17, 2013, 3:42:32 PM3/17/13
to
M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>
I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars. You
hated The Producers; I think it's great. (the original movie, not the
subsequent musical). You must keep me apprised of any movies you see
and hate.
I didn't like Les Miz. I recommend it to you.
news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>
hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars. You
hated The Producers; I think it's great. (the original movie, not the
subsequent musical). You must keep me apprised of any movies you see
and hate.
I didn't like Les Miz. I recommend it to you.
Boron Elgar
Mar 17, 2013, 3:50:22 PM3/17/13
to
Kevin
Mar 17, 2013, 3:50:37 PM3/17/13
to
On 17 Mar 2013 19:42:32 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
wrote:
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
>news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
>
>
>> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
>> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
>> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
>> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>>
>
>I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
>hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
wrote:
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
>news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
>
>
>> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
>> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
>> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
>> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>>
>
>I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
>hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
bill van
Mar 17, 2013, 4:18:43 PM3/17/13
to
In article <qi7ck8liu6a41setd...@4ax.com>,
bill
Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
> On 17 Mar 2013 19:42:32 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
> >news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
> >
> >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
> >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
>
> I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
>
Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
> On 17 Mar 2013 19:42:32 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
> >news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
> >
> >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
> >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
>
> I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
>
bill
D.F. Manno
Mar 17, 2013, 5:11:59 PM3/17/13
to
In article <billvan-A54193...@news.shawcable.net>,
bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca> wrote:
bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca> wrote:
> > > M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> > >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> > >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> > >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>
> > >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> > >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
> >
> > I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
>
> Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
> > >
> > >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
> > >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> > >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
> > >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>
> > >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> > >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
> >
> > I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
>
> Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
D.F. Manno
Mar 17, 2013, 5:13:51 PM3/17/13
to
In article <2v3ck811laelsll4m...@4ax.com>,
Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com> wrote:
> If you haven't seen it then you would probably enjoy the
> 1942 comedy, "To Be Or Not To Be", with Jack Benny. Here is a funny
> scene with Benny pretending to be a nazi party member so he can get
> his acting troupe out of Warsaw after the Germans took over:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zpgjyn7dgk
I've seen both versions.
> If you haven't seen it then you would probably enjoy the
> 1942 comedy, "To Be Or Not To Be", with Jack Benny. Here is a funny
> scene with Benny pretending to be a nazi party member so he can get
> his acting troupe out of Warsaw after the Germans took over:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zpgjyn7dgk
Tim Wright
Mar 17, 2013, 5:22:40 PM3/17/13
to
On 3/17/2013 4:13 PM, D.F. Manno wrote:
> In article <2v3ck811laelsll4m...@4ax.com>,
> Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> If you haven't seen it then you would probably enjoy the
>> 1942 comedy, "To Be Or Not To Be", with Jack Benny. Here is a funny
>> scene with Benny pretending to be a nazi party member so he can get
>> his acting troupe out of Warsaw after the Germans took over:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zpgjyn7dgk
>
> I've seen both versions.
>
Both versions are good and I have trouble deciding which I like best.
> In article <2v3ck811laelsll4m...@4ax.com>,
> Les Albert <lalb...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>> If you haven't seen it then you would probably enjoy the
>> 1942 comedy, "To Be Or Not To Be", with Jack Benny. Here is a funny
>> scene with Benny pretending to be a nazi party member so he can get
>> his acting troupe out of Warsaw after the Germans took over:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Zpgjyn7dgk
>
> I've seen both versions.
>
--
Tim W
Gus
Mar 17, 2013, 6:41:03 PM3/17/13
to
I know I should like Family Guy, but I have tried to watch a few times and
never enjoy very much... Except for the Star Wars parodies, those were
great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-w0N6JATp4
never enjoy very much... Except for the Star Wars parodies, those were
great.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-w0N6JATp4
Dover Beach
Mar 17, 2013, 7:06:10 PM3/17/13
to
"D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com> wrote in
news:dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net:
Hey, that might actually be entertaining. Would you watch all four
Twilight movies in a row?
news:dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net:
Twilight movies in a row?
bill van
Mar 17, 2013, 7:14:25 PM3/17/13
to
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 9:12:16 PM3/17/13
to
I do have a certain sympathy or at least tolerance of people who push
the envelope, if it is done for humorous purposes. I liked Ricky
Gervais at the Golden Globes the year before last, for the same
reason.
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 9:13:51 PM3/17/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 16:14:25 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
wrote:
Can you wait a year in between viewings?
wrote:
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 9:15:03 PM3/17/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 18:41:03 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
wrote:
I've never seen a single episode of Family Guy, nor do I have the
slightest interest in doing so. I think this extends to clicking on
the link you shared.
wrote:
slightest interest in doing so. I think this extends to clicking on
the link you shared.
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 9:27:54 PM3/17/13
to
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
>news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
>
>
>> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
>> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
>> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
>> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>>
>
>I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
>hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
Wait... you mean, you hate the movie simply based on what you know
>news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
>
>
>> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I found
>> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
>> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the same
>> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>>
>
>I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
>hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
about the premise of the movie? Doesn't that seem a little... weird?
I mean, I can understand if you found the premise uninteresting, but
it led you to despise the movie without having seen it?
What about its premise makes you despise it, if I may ask?
(I have this feeling we have had this conversation here before, but I
thought you had at least seen the movie.)
>You
>hated The Producers; I think it's great. (the original movie, not the
>subsequent musical).
(even though you've never seen it). But I sat in a theater, and the
audience was absolutely roaring with laughter at one excruciatingly
unfunny thing after another, and whatever it was they caught was not
sufficiently contagious to penetrate my body's immune system. I hated
the audience as much as I hated the movie, to be fair.
>You must keep me apprised of any movies you see
>and hate.
>
>I didn't like Les Miz. I recommend it to you.
Did you like "Mulholland Drive"? I loved it. Did you like "Blue
Velvet"? I hated it.
This is like that thing on Netflix to find movies to recommend, but in
reverse.
Oh, and did you like "I Saw Your Boobs"?
M C Hamster
Mar 17, 2013, 9:58:13 PM3/17/13
to
>In article <qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com>,
> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>> I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
>> don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
>> to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
>> is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
>
>1) Brooks is Jewish. McFarlane, so far as we know, is not a woman.
>
Uh, true.
> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>> I don't know how clear the setup was in the broadcast, but I really
>> don't understand how anyone who is OK with "The Producers" can object
>> to this one -- unless female nudity (including violence against women)
>> is more taboo than the Holocaust as a source of humor.
>
>1) Brooks is Jewish. McFarlane, so far as we know, is not a woman.
>
>2) Brooks has explained the reasoning behind "The Producers" repeatedly:
>"You make your enemy look ridiculous, you've won, and the best way to do
>that is with wit. Wit is sharper than the sharpest dagger." Again, so
>far as we know, McFarlane's purpose wasn't remotely as high-minded.
>
purpose could equally conceivably have been just as high-minded as
Brooks' purpose... unless you posit that it is simply impossible for
any man, ever, to legitimately see male sexism as "the enemy". (By
the same token, is it impossible for a non-Jew to hate anti-semitism?)
Imagine for a moment that MacFarlane genuinely, truly hates male
sexism, just as much as you or I do. (I do hate it, even though I am
a man. Trust me on that.) Imagine he wants to do something at the
Oscar show which points out how detestable male sexism is. So he
comes up with a song and dance number that cheerily and grotesquely
celebrates male sexism, in such an over-the-top way that it dramatizes
just how cretinous male sexism is.
I don't know MacFarlane at all. I don't watch Family Guy. MacFarlane
may be a total sexist pig. He might be mean spirited. Maybe everyone
knows this and that is part of the negative reaction, and if he is
known to be a sexist pig, then of course the criticism of him is fair.
I did not know there was the Shatner setup for this song... none of
the news stories I saw mentioned that, only that he did this song
about actresses who had revealed their boobs in movies. Based on
this, the song sounded utterly stupid to me, as well as offensive.
But hearing about the setup does change things for me. It makes me
think I might have found it a lot less offensive, had I seen it live.
Or I might still have found it stupid and unfunny and offensive. I
don't know.
>C) McFarlane should get a pass for being an asshole because he
>telegraphed that he was going to be an asshole?
this discussion.
Dover Beach
Mar 17, 2013, 10:04:28 PM3/17/13
to
M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
news:9qqck8lmir9ng330l...@4ax.com:
> On 17 Mar 2013 19:42:32 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in
>>news:qvtbk8ta6g52mkj7l...@4ax.com:
>>
>>
>>> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I
>>> found it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of
>>> the extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the
>>> same reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
>>>
>>
>>I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
>>hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
>
> Wait... you mean, you hate the movie simply based on what you know
> about the premise of the movie? Doesn't that seem a little... weird?
> I mean, I can understand if you found the premise uninteresting, but
> it led you to despise the movie without having seen it?
>
> What about its premise makes you despise it, if I may ask?
>
> (I have this feeling we have had this conversation here before, but I
> thought you had at least seen the movie.)
>
>>You
>>hated The Producers; I think it's great. (the original movie, not the
>>subsequent musical).
>
> I didn't actually totally hate it, the way you apparently hate AI
> (even though you've never seen it). But I sat in a theater, and the
> audience was absolutely roaring with laughter at one excruciatingly
> unfunny thing after another, and whatever it was they caught was not
> sufficiently contagious to penetrate my body's immune system. I hated
> the audience as much as I hated the movie, to be fair.
then later, I decided to take a different attitude towards it, and now I
like it.
>
>>You must keep me apprised of any movies you see
>>and hate.
>>
>>I didn't like Les Miz. I recommend it to you.
>
> I am agnostic on that point.
>
> Did you like "Mulholland Drive"? I loved it.
were 20 again, I'd get a boob job. Why not?
> Did you like "Blue Velvet"? I hated it.
time, and he loved it.
>
> This is like that thing on Netflix to find movies to recommend, but in
> reverse.
>
> Oh, and did you like "I Saw Your Boobs"?
18-35 year-old male crowd. But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
actually funny.
D.F. Manno
Mar 17, 2013, 10:42:05 PM3/17/13
to
make me do that.
--
D.F. Manno
Sanford Manley
Mar 17, 2013, 10:58:56 PM3/17/13
to
and shy about showing their boobs or talking about showing their boobs
unless somebody is cutting them a big check. MacFarlane took them by
surprise apparently. He says FAR more over-the-top things on Family Guy.
And don't think the movies he mentioned won't get additional play.
I sort of love the double standard having listened to women hoot over
some male star's cute buttocks, but I guess that is OK.
--
Sanford
D.F. Manno
Mar 17, 2013, 11:32:46 PM3/17/13
to
Sanford Manley <ans...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It's because you know that all these big-name actresses are embarrassed
> and shy about showing their boobs or talking about showing their boobs
> unless somebody is cutting them a big check. MacFarlane took them by
> surprise apparently. He says FAR more over-the-top things on Family Guy.
> And don't think the movies he mentioned won't get additional play.
>
> I sort of love the double standard having listened to women hoot over
> some male star's cute buttocks, but I guess that is OK.
In one case, the photo used was stolen from the actress. In several others,
> It's because you know that all these big-name actresses are embarrassed
> and shy about showing their boobs or talking about showing their boobs
> unless somebody is cutting them a big check. MacFarlane took them by
> surprise apparently. He says FAR more over-the-top things on Family Guy.
> And don't think the movies he mentioned won't get additional play.
>
> I sort of love the double standard having listened to women hoot over
> some male star's cute buttocks, but I guess that is OK.
the scenes he used were of raped/abused characters.
But that's OK, I guess. Rape is funny, right?
--
D.F. Manno
bill van
Mar 17, 2013, 11:43:54 PM3/17/13
to
In article <vhqck8p0dnf5qb2j1...@4ax.com>,
before it was over. So yeah, I'm talking about back-to-back viewings,
two years in subjective time, but only for a million bucks.
bill
M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 16:14:25 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net>,
> > "D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <billvan-A54193...@news.shawcable.net>,
> >> bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
> >> > > Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I
> >> > > >> found
> >> > > >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> >> > > >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the
> >> > > >> same
> >> > > >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
> >> >
> >> > > >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> >> > > >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
> >> >
> >> > Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
> >>
> >> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
> >
> >I'd watch Last Year at Marienbad, twice.
>
> Can you wait a year in between viewings?
The one time I saw it, sometime in the 1960s, I think, it took a year
> On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 16:14:25 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
> wrote:
>
> >In article <dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net>,
> > "D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In article <billvan-A54193...@news.shawcable.net>,
> >> bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
> >> > > Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > >> Of course, in truth I actually hated "The Producers" (because I
> >> > > >> found
> >> > > >> it very unfunny, not because I objected to its making light of the
> >> > > >> extermination of 6 million Jews), and I might well have had the
> >> > > >> same
> >> > > >> reaction to the Oscars song and dance number.
> >> >
> >> > > >I think we can work together to find films we like. You loved AI; I
> >> > > >hated the summary so much I wouldn't see it for a million dollars.
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't understand how anyone could type such a thing even in jest.
> >> >
> >> > Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
> >>
> >> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
> >
> >I'd watch Last Year at Marienbad, twice.
>
> Can you wait a year in between viewings?
before it was over. So yeah, I'm talking about back-to-back viewings,
two years in subjective time, but only for a million bucks.
bill
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 12:05:48 AM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 20:43:54 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
"If I had only one day left to live, I'd watch 'Last Year in
Marienbad'", eh?
I'm still waiting for "Barry Lyndon" to be finished.
Oh wait, is that one of Dover's favorites?
Marienbad'", eh?
I'm still waiting for "Barry Lyndon" to be finished.
Oh wait, is that one of Dover's favorites?
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 12:09:32 AM3/18/13
to
On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
wrote:
>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>actually funny.
I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
afraid.
Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
wrote:
>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>actually funny.
I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
afraid.
Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 12:27:59 AM3/18/13
to
Did you actually see MacFarlane's song-and-dance number? Or did you
just read about it, like I did, until earlier today when I actually
watched the video of it?
I hate to break it to you, but there weren't any photos shown, stolen
or obtained legally. Nor were there any "scenes used" of raped/abused
characters.
Please take a minute and actually watch it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
OK, I think it's actually mildly humorous. The song in particular
does a nice job of capturing the vacuity of perky Hollywood / Broadway
song and dance numbers. MacFarlane reminded me of Robert Goulet in
Camelot.
Having now seen the video, I think the criticism and controversy is
pretty risible... given, y'know, that in fact we DID see their boobs.
They could have easily prevented that, if they'd wanted. It's not
like they were secretly photographed in a women's locker room.
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 18, 2013, 12:38:23 AM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:42:05 +0000 (UTC), D.F. Manno
<dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
>>>
>>
>> Hey, that might actually be entertaining. Would you watch all four
>> Twilight movies in a row?
>
>Gates, Buffett, and the Koch brothers combined don't have enough money to
>make me do that.
Throw in the Waltons, then...?
<dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
>>>
>>
>> Hey, that might actually be entertaining. Would you watch all four
>> Twilight movies in a row?
>
>Gates, Buffett, and the Koch brothers combined don't have enough money to
>make me do that.
bill van
Mar 18, 2013, 2:59:46 AM3/18/13
to
In article <ug4dk8h0hidjk71e5...@4ax.com>,
I may have to see Barry Lyndon again some time, since it was Kubrick,
after all, who directed it. Maybe the first time I missed how brilliant
it was. But I do remember being bored stiff by it, and being grateful
that Kubrick hadn't directed one of my all-time favourites, Tom Jones
with the young Albert Finney and Susannah York, directed very nicely by
Tony Richardson. Not to forget an incredible supporting cast, including
David Warner, Hugh Griffith and Edith Evans.
I think I'll just watch Tom Jones again, and forget about Barry Lyndon.
bill
after all, who directed it. Maybe the first time I missed how brilliant
it was. But I do remember being bored stiff by it, and being grateful
that Kubrick hadn't directed one of my all-time favourites, Tom Jones
with the young Albert Finney and Susannah York, directed very nicely by
Tony Richardson. Not to forget an incredible supporting cast, including
David Warner, Hugh Griffith and Edith Evans.
I think I'll just watch Tom Jones again, and forget about Barry Lyndon.
bill
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 18, 2013, 3:03:25 AM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 20:43:54 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
>> Can you wait a year in between viewings?>
>The one time I saw it, sometime in the 1960s, I think, it took a year
>before it was over. So yeah, I'm talking about back-to-back viewings,
>two years in subjective time, but only for a million bucks.
I was unfamiliar:
>The one time I saw it, sometime in the 1960s, I think, it took a year
>before it was over. So yeah, I'm talking about back-to-back viewings,
>two years in subjective time, but only for a million bucks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_%281964_film%29
""
In 2007, website Nerve selected Empire as one of "The Thirteen
Greatest Long-Ass Movies of All Time".
""
Kevin
Mar 18, 2013, 3:12:27 AM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:09:32 -0500, M C Hamster
<davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>actually funny.
>
>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>
>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>afraid.
>
>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
<davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>actually funny.
>
>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>
>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>afraid.
>
>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
bill van
Mar 18, 2013, 3:15:40 AM3/18/13
to
In article <kvedk8973fglm5n2u...@4ax.com>,
My part in this thread was actually about Last Year at Marienbad, a
famous/infamous French art film that was either a brilliant cinematic
statement or a stupifyingly boring piece of over-intellectualized
claptrap.
I have seen a little Warhol and thought some editing might help.
Fortunately, I've never seen Empire. But for a million bucks...
bill
famous/infamous French art film that was either a brilliant cinematic
statement or a stupifyingly boring piece of over-intellectualized
claptrap.
I have seen a little Warhol and thought some editing might help.
Fortunately, I've never seen Empire. But for a million bucks...
bill
Kevin
Mar 18, 2013, 3:17:59 AM3/18/13
to
boobs because the pictures were stolen from her. And in the other
cases we saw boobs in a rape scene or something like that. Which does
to me sort of make it creepy to be singing cheerfully about it, no
matter what kind of framing story you get Captain Kirk to do. And yes,
I saw the video. But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
bill van
Mar 18, 2013, 5:12:06 AM3/18/13
to
In article <1hfdk8tnrdvdjiq10...@4ax.com>,
OTOH, I really can't see why otters would rape baby seals. Got a link?
bill
bill
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 7:38:32 AM3/18/13
to
intended.
There is no question on my mind that some care was taken to select the
scenes shown. If there was effort, but no context taken into account,
it isn't funny. If there was effort, but the context was disregarded,
it isn't funny.
Boron
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 7:41:16 AM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:27:59 -0500, M C Hamster
<davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>I hate to break it to you, but there weren't any photos shown, stolen
>or obtained legally. Nor were there any "scenes used" of raped/abused
>characters.
>
>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
Take another minute and see the sources of the scenes used.
<davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>I hate to break it to you, but there weren't any photos shown, stolen
>or obtained legally. Nor were there any "scenes used" of raped/abused
>characters.
>
>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
http://www.salon.com/2013/02/26/we_saw_your_boobs_is_a_celebration_of_rape_on_film/
Boron
>
Kevin
Mar 18, 2013, 9:25:46 AM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:12:06 -0700, bill van <bil...@delete.shaw.ca>
wrote:
It's not very hard to find with a google search of the relevant terms:
http://news.discovery.com/animals/the-other-side-of-otters.htm
wrote:
http://news.discovery.com/animals/the-other-side-of-otters.htm
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 10:39:13 AM3/18/13
to
lanai then, the bloody bastards.
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 10:42:35 AM3/18/13
to
Did they show a movie of the boobs in the theater (but of course not
shown on TV)?
Lesmond
Mar 18, 2013, 12:03:02 PM3/18/13
to
enjoying his hosting job.
Apparently I'm not Jewish or a woman, so I can't understand the offenses he
committed.
--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 11:15:59 AM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:17:59 -0500, Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
> But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
>is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
That is my impression, too, of Family Guy, and one reason I've never
> But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
>is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
watched it.
But I also have the impression that South Park is a retarded version
of Beavis and Butthead, and Beavis and Butthead is a retarded version
of Ren and Stimpy, and Ren and Stimpy is a retarded version of The
Simpsons, which can be somewhat funny.
And I apologize to anyone with congenital cognitive disabilities who
may be reading this thread.
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 11:18:07 AM3/18/13
to
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 12:26:44 PM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:18:07 -0400, Boron Elgar
OK, gotcha.
Here are the actresses and the movies referred to in the song's
lyrics:
Meryl Streep, we saw your boobs in “Silkwood”
Naomi Watts’ in “Mulholland Drive”
Angelina Jolie, we saw your boobs in “Gia”
Anne Hathaway, we saw your boobs in “Brokeback Mountain”
Halle Berry, we saw them in “Monster’s Ball”
Nicole Kidman in “Eyes Wide Shut”
Marisa Tomei in “The Wrestler,”
Kristen Stewart, we saw your boobs in “On the Road”
And in “Monster” we saw Charlize Theron’s
Helen Hunt, we saw them in “The Sessions”
And Scarlett Johansson, we saw them on our phones.
Jessica Chastain, we saw your boobs in “Lawless”
Jodie Foster in “The Accused”
Hilary Swank in “Boys Don’t Cry”
Penelope Cruz in “Vanilla Sky.”
And Kate Winslet in “Heavenly Creatures” and “Jude”
And “Hamlet” and “Titanic”
And “Iris” and “Little Children”
And “The Reader”
I don't watch movies so I don't know how many of these were rape
scenes. 3 or 4? Plus the Scarlett Johansson one which is, indeed,
like being photographed in a women's locker room, sorta, and wrong to
include.
You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
other movies they could have selected where the character was not
raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
agree that was wrong of them.
Here are the actresses and the movies referred to in the song's
lyrics:
Meryl Streep, we saw your boobs in “Silkwood”
Naomi Watts’ in “Mulholland Drive”
Angelina Jolie, we saw your boobs in “Gia”
Anne Hathaway, we saw your boobs in “Brokeback Mountain”
Halle Berry, we saw them in “Monster’s Ball”
Nicole Kidman in “Eyes Wide Shut”
Marisa Tomei in “The Wrestler,”
Kristen Stewart, we saw your boobs in “On the Road”
And in “Monster” we saw Charlize Theron’s
Helen Hunt, we saw them in “The Sessions”
And Scarlett Johansson, we saw them on our phones.
Jessica Chastain, we saw your boobs in “Lawless”
Jodie Foster in “The Accused”
Hilary Swank in “Boys Don’t Cry”
Penelope Cruz in “Vanilla Sky.”
And Kate Winslet in “Heavenly Creatures” and “Jude”
And “Hamlet” and “Titanic”
And “Iris” and “Little Children”
And “The Reader”
I don't watch movies so I don't know how many of these were rape
scenes. 3 or 4? Plus the Scarlett Johansson one which is, indeed,
like being photographed in a women's locker room, sorta, and wrong to
include.
You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
other movies they could have selected where the character was not
raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
agree that was wrong of them.
K_S_ONeill
Mar 18, 2013, 12:30:01 PM3/18/13
to
On Mar 18, 10:15 am, M C Hamster <davol...@nospam-speakeasy.net>
wrote:
Stimpy and The Simpsons well above that, and South Park at the peak.
Obviously YMMV. I find South Park to be wildly funny and inventive,
and almost utterly fearless, which is very endearing to me. I love
South Park. I really do. If I could only watch one tv show that might
be it.
> And I apologize to anyone with congenital cognitive disabilities who
> may be reading this thread.
We don't mind, but thank you for your concern.
--
Kevin
wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:17:59 -0500, Kevin <K_S_ONe...@yh.com> wrote:
> > But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
> >is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
>
> That is my impression, too, of Family Guy, and one reason I've never
> watched it.
>
> But I also have the impression that South Park is a retarded version
> of Beavis and Butthead, and Beavis and Butthead is a retarded version
> of Ren and Stimpy, and Ren and Stimpy is a retarded version of The
> Simpsons, which can be somewhat funny.
I put Beavis and Butthead on the same level as Family Guy, Ren and
> > But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
> >is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
>
> That is my impression, too, of Family Guy, and one reason I've never
> watched it.
>
> But I also have the impression that South Park is a retarded version
> of Beavis and Butthead, and Beavis and Butthead is a retarded version
> of Ren and Stimpy, and Ren and Stimpy is a retarded version of The
> Simpsons, which can be somewhat funny.
Stimpy and The Simpsons well above that, and South Park at the peak.
Obviously YMMV. I find South Park to be wildly funny and inventive,
and almost utterly fearless, which is very endearing to me. I love
South Park. I really do. If I could only watch one tv show that might
be it.
> And I apologize to anyone with congenital cognitive disabilities who
> may be reading this thread.
--
Kevin
Gus
Mar 18, 2013, 12:35:05 PM3/18/13
to
"Kevin" <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote in message
news:1hfdk8tnrdvdjiq10...@4ax.com...
> I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
> seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
> and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
Ted Bundy was regarded as handsome and charismatic by women.
"Bundy was regarded as handsome and charismatic by his young female victims,
traits he exploited in winning their trust. He typically approached them in
public places, feigning an injury or disability, or impersonating an
authority figure, before overpowering and assaulting them at a more secluded
location. He sometimes revisited his secondary crime scenes for hours at a
time, grooming and performing sexual acts with the decomposing corpses until
putrefaction and destruction by wild animals made further interaction
impossible. He decapitated at least 12 victims and kept some of the severed
heads in his apartment for a period of time as mementos."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy
news:1hfdk8tnrdvdjiq10...@4ax.com...
> I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
> seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
> and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
"Bundy was regarded as handsome and charismatic by his young female victims,
traits he exploited in winning their trust. He typically approached them in
public places, feigning an injury or disability, or impersonating an
authority figure, before overpowering and assaulting them at a more secluded
location. He sometimes revisited his secondary crime scenes for hours at a
time, grooming and performing sexual acts with the decomposing corpses until
putrefaction and destruction by wild animals made further interaction
impossible. He decapitated at least 12 victims and kept some of the severed
heads in his apartment for a period of time as mementos."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ted_Bundy
Gus
Mar 18, 2013, 1:06:18 PM3/18/13
to
"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in message
news:61vdk89680tmcgnfe...@4ax.com...
it succeeded... Personally, I don't care for Mr. MacFarlane and did not
watch the show but did watch the clip of Shatner and him and the song when
it kept coming up in the news. In a sense, it is interesting that in the
opening Shatner says he is going to be the worst host ever. And he did
achieve coming across as juvenile and a bad host... This all reminds me of
Andrew Dice Clay and his "act."
"Did you hate Seth MacFarlane's "We Saw Your Boobs" song at this year's
Oscars? If so it's your own fault, according to the show's producers.
It has been three weeks since the 85th annual Oscars, and the show's
producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan are still defending host Seth
MacFarlane for his controversial "We Saw Your Boobs" song, which calls out
several high-profile actresses who have appeared topless in films. Most of
the criticism directed at MacFarlane alleges that the host's song was
sexist, since it referenced nude scenes in film that depicted rape.
But Meron and Zadan say that MacFarlane's critics missed the joke.
Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter at Saturday night's GLAAD Awards, the two
producers said that they were "really proud" of MacFarlane's hosting job,
partially because the controversy surrounding the show thrust the Oscars
into "the cultural conversation."
But still, most folks in "the cultural conversation" have nothing nice to
say about MacFarlane's hosting gig. Writing for The Huffington Post, actress
Jamie Lee Curtis lambasted MacFarlane, and the awards in general.
"The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
Oscars are truly about? Ratings? When did they turn into a 'roast'?"
Another actress who criticized MacFarlane's Oscar performance was Jane
Fonda, who wrote on her website:
"What I really didn't like was the song and dance number about seeing
actresses boobs. I agree with someone who said, 'If they want to stoop to
that, why not list all the penises we've seen?' Better yet, remember that
this is a telecast seen around the world watched by families with their
children and to many this is neither appropriate or funny."
But Zadan says that anyone upset over "We Saw Your Boobs" just missed the
joke.
"It was not about the women that were mentioned, the song was about him
being a bad host and him being a juvenile, which was why he was a bad host,"
Zadan said. Meron added: "Everyone who complained missed the joke, it was
satire."
"We live in a society that is not very conscious of satire anymore, they're
very serious," he said.
Additionally, Zadan added that some people he has spoken to didn't think
MacFarlane went far enough.
"I spoke to somebody yesterday and they were disappointed that he didn't go
further," he recalled. "So you can't really gauge; somebody thinks it's too
much, some people think its just enough. he brought in the youngest demos
that the Oscars have ever had."
http://www.inquisitr.com/576342/oscar-producers-blame-critics-for-seth-macfarlanes-we-saw-your-boobs-video/#YGdc5em3mkSeZkRF.99
news:61vdk89680tmcgnfe...@4ax.com...
> This aspect of it indicated that there was really no humor even
> intended.
>
> There is no question on my mind that some care was taken to select the
> scenes shown. If there was effort, but no context taken into account,
> it isn't funny. If there was effort, but the context was disregarded,
> it isn't funny.
>
> Boron
Apparently, it was about provoking, and brining in a younger demo. In that,
> intended.
>
> There is no question on my mind that some care was taken to select the
> scenes shown. If there was effort, but no context taken into account,
> it isn't funny. If there was effort, but the context was disregarded,
> it isn't funny.
>
> Boron
it succeeded... Personally, I don't care for Mr. MacFarlane and did not
watch the show but did watch the clip of Shatner and him and the song when
it kept coming up in the news. In a sense, it is interesting that in the
opening Shatner says he is going to be the worst host ever. And he did
achieve coming across as juvenile and a bad host... This all reminds me of
Andrew Dice Clay and his "act."
"Did you hate Seth MacFarlane's "We Saw Your Boobs" song at this year's
Oscars? If so it's your own fault, according to the show's producers.
It has been three weeks since the 85th annual Oscars, and the show's
producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan are still defending host Seth
MacFarlane for his controversial "We Saw Your Boobs" song, which calls out
several high-profile actresses who have appeared topless in films. Most of
the criticism directed at MacFarlane alleges that the host's song was
sexist, since it referenced nude scenes in film that depicted rape.
But Meron and Zadan say that MacFarlane's critics missed the joke.
Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter at Saturday night's GLAAD Awards, the two
producers said that they were "really proud" of MacFarlane's hosting job,
partially because the controversy surrounding the show thrust the Oscars
into "the cultural conversation."
But still, most folks in "the cultural conversation" have nothing nice to
say about MacFarlane's hosting gig. Writing for The Huffington Post, actress
Jamie Lee Curtis lambasted MacFarlane, and the awards in general.
"The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
Oscars are truly about? Ratings? When did they turn into a 'roast'?"
Another actress who criticized MacFarlane's Oscar performance was Jane
Fonda, who wrote on her website:
"What I really didn't like was the song and dance number about seeing
actresses boobs. I agree with someone who said, 'If they want to stoop to
that, why not list all the penises we've seen?' Better yet, remember that
this is a telecast seen around the world watched by families with their
children and to many this is neither appropriate or funny."
But Zadan says that anyone upset over "We Saw Your Boobs" just missed the
joke.
"It was not about the women that were mentioned, the song was about him
being a bad host and him being a juvenile, which was why he was a bad host,"
Zadan said. Meron added: "Everyone who complained missed the joke, it was
satire."
"We live in a society that is not very conscious of satire anymore, they're
very serious," he said.
Additionally, Zadan added that some people he has spoken to didn't think
MacFarlane went far enough.
"I spoke to somebody yesterday and they were disappointed that he didn't go
further," he recalled. "So you can't really gauge; somebody thinks it's too
much, some people think its just enough. he brought in the youngest demos
that the Oscars have ever had."
http://www.inquisitr.com/576342/oscar-producers-blame-critics-for-seth-macfarlanes-we-saw-your-boobs-video/#YGdc5em3mkSeZkRF.99
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 1:15:47 PM3/18/13
to
question.
>You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
>select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
>other movies they could have selected where the character was not
>raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
>criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
>is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
>agree that was wrong of them.
ignorance by choosing films that displayed violence and abuse and
invasion of privacy.
Boron
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 1:31:53 PM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:06:18 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in message
>news:61vdk89680tmcgnfe...@4ax.com...
>> This aspect of it indicated that there was really no humor even
>> intended.
>>
>> There is no question on my mind that some care was taken to select the
>> scenes shown. If there was effort, but no context taken into account,
>> it isn't funny. If there was effort, but the context was disregarded,
>> it isn't funny.
>>
>> Boron
>
>
>Apparently, it was about provoking, and brining in a younger demo.
Apparently it was not about anything like that at all.
> In that,
>it succeeded...
Particularly *young males* - a coveted demographic for advertisers.
That is MacFarlane's fan base. Duh.
> Personally, I don't care for Mr. MacFarlane and did not
>watch the show but did watch the clip of Shatner and him and the song when
>it kept coming up in the news. In a sense, it is interesting that in the
>opening Shatner says he is going to be the worst host ever. And he did
>achieve coming across as juvenile and a bad host... This all reminds me of
>Andrew Dice Clay and his "act."
Who and which I detested also.
say, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
>But still, most folks in "the cultural conversation" have nothing nice to
>say about MacFarlane's hosting gig. Writing for The Huffington Post, actress
>Jamie Lee Curtis lambasted MacFarlane, and the awards in general.
>
>"The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
>highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
>sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
>Oscars are truly about? Ratings? When did they turn into a 'roast'?"
>
>Another actress who criticized MacFarlane's Oscar performance was Jane
>Fonda, who wrote on her website:
>
>"What I really didn't like was the song and dance number about seeing
>actresses boobs. I agree with someone who said, 'If they want to stoop to
>that, why not list all the penises we've seen?' Better yet, remember that
>this is a telecast seen around the world watched by families with their
>children and to many this is neither appropriate or funny."
>
>But Zadan says that anyone upset over "We Saw Your Boobs" just missed the
>joke.
Or wasn't a male 18-34 - or Lesmond.
Boron
wrote:
>"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in message
>news:61vdk89680tmcgnfe...@4ax.com...
>> This aspect of it indicated that there was really no humor even
>> intended.
>>
>> There is no question on my mind that some care was taken to select the
>> scenes shown. If there was effort, but no context taken into account,
>> it isn't funny. If there was effort, but the context was disregarded,
>> it isn't funny.
>>
>> Boron
>
>
>Apparently, it was about provoking, and brining in a younger demo.
> In that,
>it succeeded...
Particularly *young males* - a coveted demographic for advertisers.
That is MacFarlane's fan base. Duh.
> Personally, I don't care for Mr. MacFarlane and did not
>watch the show but did watch the clip of Shatner and him and the song when
>it kept coming up in the news. In a sense, it is interesting that in the
>opening Shatner says he is going to be the worst host ever. And he did
>achieve coming across as juvenile and a bad host... This all reminds me of
>Andrew Dice Clay and his "act."
>
>"Did you hate Seth MacFarlane's "We Saw Your Boobs" song at this year's
>Oscars? If so it's your own fault, according to the show's producers.
>
>It has been three weeks since the 85th annual Oscars, and the show's
>producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan are still defending host Seth
>MacFarlane for his controversial "We Saw Your Boobs" song, which calls out
>several high-profile actresses who have appeared topless in films. Most of
>the criticism directed at MacFarlane alleges that the host's song was
>sexist, since it referenced nude scenes in film that depicted rape.
>
>But Meron and Zadan say that MacFarlane's critics missed the joke.
I have met Zadan on more than one occasion. He's a prick.
>"Did you hate Seth MacFarlane's "We Saw Your Boobs" song at this year's
>Oscars? If so it's your own fault, according to the show's producers.
>
>It has been three weeks since the 85th annual Oscars, and the show's
>producers Neil Meron and Craig Zadan are still defending host Seth
>MacFarlane for his controversial "We Saw Your Boobs" song, which calls out
>several high-profile actresses who have appeared topless in films. Most of
>the criticism directed at MacFarlane alleges that the host's song was
>sexist, since it referenced nude scenes in film that depicted rape.
>
>But Meron and Zadan say that MacFarlane's critics missed the joke.
>
>Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter at Saturday night's GLAAD Awards, the two
>producers said that they were "really proud" of MacFarlane's hosting job,
>partially because the controversy surrounding the show thrust the Oscars
>into "the cultural conversation."
No it didn't. Every Oscar presentation get blabbed about. And as they
>Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter at Saturday night's GLAAD Awards, the two
>producers said that they were "really proud" of MacFarlane's hosting job,
>partially because the controversy surrounding the show thrust the Oscars
>into "the cultural conversation."
say, there is no such thing as bad publicity.
>But still, most folks in "the cultural conversation" have nothing nice to
>say about MacFarlane's hosting gig. Writing for The Huffington Post, actress
>Jamie Lee Curtis lambasted MacFarlane, and the awards in general.
>
>"The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
>highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
>sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
>Oscars are truly about? Ratings? When did they turn into a 'roast'?"
>
>Another actress who criticized MacFarlane's Oscar performance was Jane
>Fonda, who wrote on her website:
>
>"What I really didn't like was the song and dance number about seeing
>actresses boobs. I agree with someone who said, 'If they want to stoop to
>that, why not list all the penises we've seen?' Better yet, remember that
>this is a telecast seen around the world watched by families with their
>children and to many this is neither appropriate or funny."
>
>But Zadan says that anyone upset over "We Saw Your Boobs" just missed the
>joke.
>
>"It was not about the women that were mentioned, the song was about him
>being a bad host and him being a juvenile, which was why he was a bad host,"
>Zadan said. Meron added: "Everyone who complained missed the joke, it was
>satire."
>
>"We live in a society that is not very conscious of satire anymore, they're
>very serious," he said.
>
>Additionally, Zadan added that some people he has spoken to didn't think
>MacFarlane went far enough.
I told you he's a prick.
>"It was not about the women that were mentioned, the song was about him
>being a bad host and him being a juvenile, which was why he was a bad host,"
>Zadan said. Meron added: "Everyone who complained missed the joke, it was
>satire."
>
>"We live in a society that is not very conscious of satire anymore, they're
>very serious," he said.
>
>Additionally, Zadan added that some people he has spoken to didn't think
>MacFarlane went far enough.
>
>"I spoke to somebody yesterday and they were disappointed that he didn't go
>further," he recalled. "So you can't really gauge; somebody thinks it's too
>much, some people think its just enough. he brought in the youngest demos
>that the Oscars have ever had."
>
>http://www.inquisitr.com/576342/oscar-producers-blame-critics-for-seth-macfarlanes-we-saw-your-boobs-video/#YGdc5em3mkSeZkRF.99
>
>
He's a prick.
>"I spoke to somebody yesterday and they were disappointed that he didn't go
>further," he recalled. "So you can't really gauge; somebody thinks it's too
>much, some people think its just enough. he brought in the youngest demos
>that the Oscars have ever had."
>
>http://www.inquisitr.com/576342/oscar-producers-blame-critics-for-seth-macfarlanes-we-saw-your-boobs-video/#YGdc5em3mkSeZkRF.99
>
>
Boron
Gus
Mar 18, 2013, 2:04:56 PM3/18/13
to
"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in message
news:j9jek85mgpcoalba8...@4ax.com...
> He's a prick.
He should read Mother Night by Vonnegut. Or, at least see the movie (I
thought the movie was well done).
bill van
Mar 18, 2013, 2:40:27 PM3/18/13
to
In article <g85ek89787uhabs48...@4ax.com>,
First I'd heard of it. Very strange, although the writer of the piece
did come up with an explanation.
bill
did come up with an explanation.
bill
Lesmond
Mar 18, 2013, 3:54:25 PM3/18/13
to
On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 16:14:25 -0700, bill van wrote:
>In article <dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net>,
> "D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <billvan-A54193...@news.shawcable.net>,
>> >
>In article <dfmanno-D57862...@news.albasani.net>,
> "D.F. Manno" <dfm...@mail.com> wrote:
>
>> In article <billvan-A54193...@news.shawcable.net>,
>> >
>> > Me too. I will see any movie of anyone's choosing for a million dollars.
>>
>> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
>
>I'd watch Last Year at Marienbad, twice.
Tried it twice. Fell asleep twice. Someday I'll make it.
>>
>> For a million bucks, I'd watch Andy Warhol's "Empire."
>
>I'd watch Last Year at Marienbad, twice.
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 3:41:45 PM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:15:47 -0400, Boron Elgar
Right, there were 4 mentioned in that article. There were 21 movies
included in the song, so that is 19.0%. So the question becomes, of
all movies where well-known actresses bare their breasts, what percent
of them involve situations of rape or violence against the women? Then
we can run a significance test to see if 19.0% is statistically
different from that number.
If we include the Scarlett Johansson case, it becomes 5 of 22 or
22.7%.
I'm assuming none of the others involved rape or violence, or they
would have been included in the Salon article.
>
>>You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
>>select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
>>other movies they could have selected where the character was not
>>raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
>>criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
>>is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
>>agree that was wrong of them.
>
>
>No, I am saying that they displayed incredible insensitivity and
>ignorance by choosing films that displayed violence and abuse and
>invasion of privacy.
>
OK, I agree about the insensitivity and ignorance, versus a
well-considered, deliberate glorification of rape and violence against
women which you seemed to be saying by your statement "there is no
way or the other in writing their song. I think there would have been
almost equal outrage if none of the scenes had involved rape or
violence... that a man at the Oscars should not be mentioning names of
specific actresses who have gone topless in scenes in movies, even if
they were just love scenes.
included in the song, so that is 19.0%. So the question becomes, of
all movies where well-known actresses bare their breasts, what percent
of them involve situations of rape or violence against the women? Then
we can run a significance test to see if 19.0% is statistically
different from that number.
If we include the Scarlett Johansson case, it becomes 5 of 22 or
22.7%.
I'm assuming none of the others involved rape or violence, or they
would have been included in the Salon article.
>
>>You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
>>select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
>>other movies they could have selected where the character was not
>>raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
>>criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
>>is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
>>agree that was wrong of them.
>
>
>No, I am saying that they displayed incredible insensitivity and
>ignorance by choosing films that displayed violence and abuse and
>invasion of privacy.
>
well-considered, deliberate glorification of rape and violence against
women which you seemed to be saying by your statement "there is no
question on my mind that some care was taken to select the scenes
shown". My hypothesis is that they did not think about the issue one
way or the other in writing their song. I think there would have been
almost equal outrage if none of the scenes had involved rape or
violence... that a man at the Oscars should not be mentioning names of
specific actresses who have gone topless in scenes in movies, even if
they were just love scenes.
K_S_ONeill
Mar 18, 2013, 4:17:23 PM3/18/13
to
they're not picking stuff at random then I assume they intended to
include all the stuff they included.
> If we include the Scarlett Johansson case, it becomes 5 of 22 or
> 22.7%.
>
> I'm assuming none of the others involved rape or violence, or they
> would have been included in the Salon article.
>
>
>
> >>You seem to be saying that they went to some effort to deliberately
> >>select movies where the character had been raped, versus choosing
> >>other movies they could have selected where the character was not
> >>raped. Doesn't that seem just a bit far-fetched? I'm guessing other
> >>criteria were used... syllable count to fit the song, for instance. It
> >>is true that they didn't stop to think about the movie context, and I
> >>agree that was wrong of them.
>
> >No, I am saying that they displayed incredible insensitivity and
> >ignorance by choosing films that displayed violence and abuse and
> >invasion of privacy.
>
> OK, I agree about the insensitivity and ignorance, versus a
> well-considered, deliberate glorification of rape and violence against
> women which you seemed to be saying by your statement "there is no
> question on my mind that some care was taken to select the scenes
> shown". My hypothesis is that they did not think about the issue one
> way or the other in writing their song.
devoted to excellence in entertainment they just didn't think much
about the entertainment they were going to provide? Ok.
I, on the other hand, think they sort of buried the really offensive
stuff in less offensive stuff, in the same way they tried to bury the
whole thing in a framing story featuring Captain Kirk. Everything in
there was in there on purpose, because they do this for a living and
they know to a great number of decimal points how offensive they can
be without getting Kramered.
> I think there would have been
> almost equal outrage if none of the scenes had involved rape or
> violence... that a man at the Oscars should not be mentioning names of
> specific actresses who have gone topless in scenes in movies, even if
> they were just love scenes.
least. I think it's one thing to pick on an actress who does a topless
scene in a stupid romantic comedy or a teen slasher flick, just to
flash her tits and make some money and stir things up. I'd still think
it was junior high level humor, but ok. If she wants to walk around
topless, you can snigger at her, fine, I don't care.
But in, again, an awards ceremony devoted to excellence in the movies,
he's going to pick out Hillary Swank's rape scene in Boys Don't Cry
and out of that astonishing, powerful, amazing movie his comment is,
"Ha ha, I saw your tits!", I mean, fuck him. Fuck him. He can say it
if he wants, fine, they hired him to pull in the Tucker Max crowd, ok.
And I can say what I think of him, which is fuck him.
It's not bold, it's not edgy, it's stupid and juvenile and clunky.
It's not something Trey and Matt would do on South Park, not because
it's too edgy for them, they did a show about making a kid eat his own
parents in a soup. They wouldn't do it because it was crass and
exactly at the humor level of a dull seventh grader. So they got their
Tucker Max crowd, fine, now I hope they get crucified for it with
their lame fucking framing story evasion, I hope Jon Stewart fucks
these assholes for fifteen solid minutes like a sea otter on a dead
baby seal, I hope desperately that Trey and Matt do a whole fucking
show on what a douchebag this fuckwit and the fuckwits who hired him
are. Maybe that way they'll elevate their game a little and have
something funny and smart next time, instead of thinking there's no
penalty to playing to the stupidest demographic they can think of.* I
hope this doesn't go away for months, hell, I hope every time someone
sees McFarlane's smarmy fucking mug for years this is all they can
think of, the little fuck.
Ahem. So, in brief, no. I do not think that a song that merely
chronicled cheerful boobies in recent movies would have been nearly as
criticized, nor should it have been, as one that picked out stolen
nude pictures and stills from rape scenes and said "Ha ha, we saw your
boobies!" and then tried to bury it and act innocent. Christ, now I
really am all pissed off about this all over again.
--
Kevin
*all this excludes Lesmond, whose tastes are merely inexplicable.
Seriously, there will always be smart people who find dumb stuff
funny, I can't explain it. I understand there are even smart people
who found Borat funny. I myself, in my weaker moments, have been known
to watch Honey Boo Boo with The Girl, and to even snicker a little.
It's true. I am ashame.
M C Hamster
Mar 18, 2013, 5:27:03 PM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 13:17:23 -0700 (PDT), K_S_ONeill
<uan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ahem. So, in brief, no. I do not think that a song that merely
>chronicled cheerful boobies in recent movies would have been nearly as
>criticized, nor should it have been, as one that picked out stolen
>nude pictures and stills from rape scenes and said "Ha ha, we saw your
>boobies!" and then tried to bury it and act innocent. Christ, now I
>really am all pissed off about this all over again.
I'm sorry to say this, but it was really worth it reading your
<uan...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Ahem. So, in brief, no. I do not think that a song that merely
>chronicled cheerful boobies in recent movies would have been nearly as
>criticized, nor should it have been, as one that picked out stolen
>nude pictures and stills from rape scenes and said "Ha ha, we saw your
>boobies!" and then tried to bury it and act innocent. Christ, now I
>really am all pissed off about this all over again.
glorious rant. But I'll stop now because we all want you to be
posting here for a good, long time.
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 5:31:33 PM3/18/13
to
>Ahem. So, in brief, no. I do not think that a song that merely
>chronicled cheerful boobies in recent movies would have been nearly as
>criticized, nor should it have been, as one that picked out stolen
>nude pictures and stills from rape scenes and said "Ha ha, we saw your
>boobies!" and then tried to bury it and act innocent. Christ, now I
>really am all pissed off about this all over again.
Paid for by the I am Leroy and I endorse this message PAC.
>chronicled cheerful boobies in recent movies would have been nearly as
>criticized, nor should it have been, as one that picked out stolen
>nude pictures and stills from rape scenes and said "Ha ha, we saw your
>boobies!" and then tried to bury it and act innocent. Christ, now I
>really am all pissed off about this all over again.
Boron
.
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 18, 2013, 6:23:32 PM3/18/13
to
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 18, 2013, 6:29:15 PM3/18/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 11:03:02 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>I think you might be the first one here who didn't give me shit about
>enjoying his hosting job.
_I_ ditten!
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>I think you might be the first one here who didn't give me shit about
>enjoying his hosting job.
Sanford Manley
Mar 18, 2013, 6:52:05 PM3/18/13
to
On 3/18/2013 1:06 PM, Gus wrote:
> "The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
> highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
> sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
> Oscars are truly about?
Public executions would be an improvement over the Oscars program
> "The 'boob' song, as it will be known in perpetuity, may go down as the
> highest-rated Oscar number in history, but at what cost?" Curtis asked. "I'm
> sure public executions would get big ratings too, but is that what the
> Oscars are truly about?
which is the entertainment industry's public display of mutual
masturbation.
Perhaps we can get a couple of hundred horny otters to
provide entertainment.
--
Sanford
Tim Wright
Mar 18, 2013, 7:12:06 PM3/18/13
to
--
Tim W
Brettster
Mar 18, 2013, 7:50:42 PM3/18/13
to
On Monday, March 18, 2013 1:17:23 PM UTC-7, K_S_ONeill wrote:
> they did a show about making a kid eat his own
> parents in a soup.
It was actually chili. That's COMPLETELY different!
> they did a show about making a kid eat his own
> parents in a soup.
Alan J Rosenthal
Mar 18, 2013, 8:24:14 PM3/18/13
to
M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>Having now seen the video, I think the criticism and controversy is
>pretty risible... given, y'know, that in fact we DID see their boobs.
>They could have easily prevented that, if they'd wanted. It's not
>like they were secretly photographed in a women's locker room.
1) As noted, one of the "boobs showings" was entirely non-voluntary.
2) Female actors are pressured into doing nude scenes. Please see, for
an extreme example, the item in http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0080487/trivia
which says (I just happened to read this last week):
Cindy Morgan did not want to appear topless in the movie.
While director Harold Ramis was amenable to changing the scene,
producer Jon Peters asked to talk to her while Ramis had her on
the phone. When the call ended, Peters informed Ramis that Morgan
would do the topless scene - because Peters had told her she would
never work again in Hollywood if she didn't. Morgan recounted in
July 2010 that this incident contributed to her not working again
(voluntarily) for a long time afterward.
Why do you think that there is so much more female nudity than male nudity
in modern feature films? Does the audience consist solely of (straight)
men and gay women? I think that that's only about half the audience.
Why not have just as much male nudity for the wanking pleasure of the
man-loving half of the superficial audience members [footnote]?
Because actors for the most part don't want to do nude scenes (plenty
of exceptions I'm sure), and more men have the power not to, and the
largely-male filmmaking establishment has the power to force women to.
p.s. most female nudity in feature films is about consensual sex, so I
can't accept it as coincidental what a large fraction of these mentions
are rape scenes.
[footnote] I feel it's pretty superficial to view a film because you want
to see one of the actors naked. Films worth viewing have more to offer
than that. (Pornographic films are a different matter, I don't think
we're talking about those.)
p.p.s. men's greater power not to do nude scenes includes being a member
of the privileged sex who are taken more seriously as (in this case) actors
rather than just sex objects.
Boron Elgar
Mar 18, 2013, 9:16:09 PM3/18/13
to
On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, fl...@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
wrote:
Interesting post, Alan.
Here is a link to an NYT article about female nudity in film from 13
years ago, with Rosie Perez, Sarah Jessica Parker, Sandra Bernhard,
Sarity Choudhury, Debi Mazar, and Amber Valetta, in a discussion with
Mim Udovitch, from Rolling Stone.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/25/magazine/the-pressure-to-take-it-off.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
And another piece here:
http://www.hollywood.com/news/brief/49471889/jennifer-ehle-threw-up-after-first-nude-scenes?page=all
It is not difficult, either, to find women who are quite comfortable
with it all, as you say. Ain't nothing wrong with that.
http://www.hitfix.com/immaculate-noise/olivia-wilde-talks-about-nudity-in-drinking-buddies-consent-in-hollywood
Frankly, doing a group nude scene in a Broadway setting never bothered
me, and there were as many males as females on the stage
participating, but that was a very gentle, non-sexual depiction. Even
at that age, I do not think that I would have been pleased, had the
tenor of that scene been violent or exploitive and then taken publicly
as a joke. But I was a pretty militant feminist back then, too.
I do not have any problem with a performer appearing nude. None
whatsoever. I do get into quite a snit about depictions of violence or
abuse of women being turned into jokes. I'd feel the same if it were
about males. There are more than enough ha-ha nude moments in films
that could have been used. It wouldn't have made the Oscar piece any
more humorous, but it would have made it less onerous.
But listen, anyone else here who has done public nude scenes as part
of entertainment can speak up and let me know how they felt about it
and feel about it. I'd love to know.
Boron
wrote:
Here is a link to an NYT article about female nudity in film from 13
years ago, with Rosie Perez, Sarah Jessica Parker, Sandra Bernhard,
Sarity Choudhury, Debi Mazar, and Amber Valetta, in a discussion with
Mim Udovitch, from Rolling Stone.
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/06/25/magazine/the-pressure-to-take-it-off.html?pagewanted=all&src=pm
And another piece here:
http://www.hollywood.com/news/brief/49471889/jennifer-ehle-threw-up-after-first-nude-scenes?page=all
It is not difficult, either, to find women who are quite comfortable
with it all, as you say. Ain't nothing wrong with that.
http://www.hitfix.com/immaculate-noise/olivia-wilde-talks-about-nudity-in-drinking-buddies-consent-in-hollywood
Frankly, doing a group nude scene in a Broadway setting never bothered
me, and there were as many males as females on the stage
participating, but that was a very gentle, non-sexual depiction. Even
at that age, I do not think that I would have been pleased, had the
tenor of that scene been violent or exploitive and then taken publicly
as a joke. But I was a pretty militant feminist back then, too.
I do not have any problem with a performer appearing nude. None
whatsoever. I do get into quite a snit about depictions of violence or
abuse of women being turned into jokes. I'd feel the same if it were
about males. There are more than enough ha-ha nude moments in films
that could have been used. It wouldn't have made the Oscar piece any
more humorous, but it would have made it less onerous.
But listen, anyone else here who has done public nude scenes as part
of entertainment can speak up and let me know how they felt about it
and feel about it. I'd love to know.
Boron
Dover Beach
Mar 18, 2013, 10:03:47 PM3/18/13
to
Boron Elgar <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in
news:bodfk8t3pmh98n5vj...@4ax.com:
> Here is a link to an NYT article about female nudity in film from 13
> years ago, with Rosie Perez, Sarah Jessica Parker, Sandra Bernhard,
> Sarity Choudhury, Debi Mazar, and Amber Valetta, in a discussion with
> Mim Udovitch, from Rolling Stone.
>
wore a bra during sex. My DH would probably complain if I wore
underwear during The Act. Moreover, since all the other actresses
stripped, it seemed to me that S.J.P. was just exerting her control over
the show. Somedays, I'm glad I went into academia and IT, since
stripping wasn't typically required. Requested, but not required.
BillT...@invalid.com
Mar 18, 2013, 11:21:02 PM3/18/13
to
You Do Not Want To Try To Work Both Sides Of The Camera Concurrently
Xho Jingleheimerschmidt
Mar 19, 2013, 12:20:54 AM3/19/13
to
stripped. Not that I was particularly good at either.
Xho
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 12:39:15 AM3/19/13
to
"Dover Beach" <moon.b...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:XnsA187CC17EDBBCmo...@130.133.4.11...
It always strikes me as very strange to show either the man or woman with
clothes on. More believable to just show them under the covers, than to
show the woman with her bra still on. It makes no sense to (me) not to both
be completely naked. On Californication, they show plenty of skin; but
occasionally there will be an actress that comes on the show and is never
topless, even after being with Hank. It's fine if she doesn't want to, but
it just is weird to show her with a bra on. I don't think any (straight)
guy is going to be happy with that, if you can't get to second base how you
supposed to get to third base and home?
Is there ever too much nudity? I kinda liked Girls the first season, but
after 2-3 episodes this year, I just couldn't take any more of seeing Lena
Dunham naked. It's not so much I'm tired of seeing her naked, but I really
don't like her tattoos; and it almost seems forced at times (her being
naked, and others) on that show. The Onion had a story about Denham
considering being naked for all of next season. "At press time, fans were
abuzz after a tweet from Dunham hinted at an all-nude third season."
Satire, but I could see her think that would be edgy and considering it.
news:XnsA187CC17EDBBCmo...@130.133.4.11...
clothes on. More believable to just show them under the covers, than to
show the woman with her bra still on. It makes no sense to (me) not to both
be completely naked. On Californication, they show plenty of skin; but
occasionally there will be an actress that comes on the show and is never
topless, even after being with Hank. It's fine if she doesn't want to, but
it just is weird to show her with a bra on. I don't think any (straight)
guy is going to be happy with that, if you can't get to second base how you
supposed to get to third base and home?
Is there ever too much nudity? I kinda liked Girls the first season, but
after 2-3 episodes this year, I just couldn't take any more of seeing Lena
Dunham naked. It's not so much I'm tired of seeing her naked, but I really
don't like her tattoos; and it almost seems forced at times (her being
naked, and others) on that show. The Onion had a story about Denham
considering being naked for all of next season. "At press time, fans were
abuzz after a tweet from Dunham hinted at an all-nude third season."
Satire, but I could see her think that would be edgy and considering it.
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 12:50:22 AM3/19/13
to
"Xho Jingleheimerschmidt" <xho...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:ki8p05$22k$1...@dont-email.me...
Could be confusing if you replied to a want ad that said: Strippers Wanted.
news:ki8p05$22k$1...@dont-email.me...
Boron Elgar
Mar 19, 2013, 7:14:01 AM3/19/13
to
On 19 Mar 2013 02:03:47 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
wrote:
What, no furry outfits?!?
She is fortunate to have achieved and maintained the control over what
she is required to do in any particular show or film she is in. Not
all actors have or want that.
Boron
wrote:
She is fortunate to have achieved and maintained the control over what
she is required to do in any particular show or film she is in. Not
all actors have or want that.
Boron
Boron Elgar
Mar 19, 2013, 7:15:50 AM3/19/13
to
Boron
Boron Elgar
Mar 19, 2013, 7:30:45 AM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 00:39:15 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
wrote:
>
>
>It always strikes me as very strange to show either the man or woman with
>clothes on.
In case you may be wondering, TV and film are not real life.
Boron
wrote:
>
>
>It always strikes me as very strange to show either the man or woman with
>clothes on.
Boron
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 12:11:01 PM3/19/13
to
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
You make many good points about why you found the scene so obnoxious.
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
In defense of my finding the scene somewhat humorous:
1. I was previously unaware of the issues your post raised about the
pressures on actresses to go topless. And when I watched the video
the first time I was not aware of any of the movies mentioned, nor
frankly of many of the names of the actresses mentioned either. So I
did, without thinking about it for one second, assume the scenes were
entered into willingly by the actresses, and that the specific
references were to movie love scenes and not scenes relating to
violence against women. Had I been aware and thought of these things
while watching the scene, I imagine I'd have found it less humorous.
(I take it these were front and center in your mind as you were
watching it... I wonder if they would have been had you been watching
the broadcast live.)
2. I also had no particular ingoing hatred of Seth MacFarlane based
on anything I knew about him, except that he did a foul-mouthed TV
cartoon show in the exact same vein as South Park (which I watched
once and detested), and I had (and still have, despite Kevin's
testimonial on behalf of South Park) an equal dislike of MacFarlane,
and Parker and Stone -- not hatred, but dislike. Had I hated
MacFarlane already, I doubt I would have even watched it, and if I did
I doubt i would have found it at all humorous.
3. If one assumes: a) the actresses willingly, if perhaps
reluctantly, agreed to do nude scenes, and b) the scenes depicted are
of love scenes, and c) Seth MacFarlane is not someone already known to
be a terrible, horrible, sexist human being, i.e., then I think the
song can be seen as mildly humorous. Or, I should say, it was to me,
despite my hating South Park (ha ha, jokes about kids born with a
handicap, ha ha ha, look, I've got milk running out of my nose I'm
laughing so much) and, probably if I ever watched an episode, Family
Guy.
4. Importantly, my surprisingly positive reaction to the clip had
almost everything to do with expectations. Based on what I had read
about this song, I had zero interest watching it, as it sounded smarmy
and stupid, until I heard about the Shatner setup and that changed my
expectations enough so that I was willing to watch it. For me, how
much I like or dislike something has a great deal to do with
expectations, and my expectations for this song were rock bottom going
in, so I was surprised how well done it was, in terms of the mock
musical style and the gay chorus and all that.
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 12:29:28 PM3/19/13
to
"Boron Elgar" <boron...@hootmail.com> wrote in message
news:uvigk8t4vpteimqmc...@4ax.com...
MacFarlane (and the Oscar producers) could say that about the movie clips
they chose while singing about boobs. All the clips were from movies with
actors, not documentaries with real people.
news:uvigk8t4vpteimqmc...@4ax.com...
they chose while singing about boobs. All the clips were from movies with
actors, not documentaries with real people.
Boron Elgar
Mar 19, 2013, 12:48:15 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:29:28 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
wrote:
And yet they still depict violence or abuse of women.
And now I have to go wash my hands.
Boron
wrote:
And now I have to go wash my hands.
Boron
David J. Martin
Mar 19, 2013, 1:38:56 PM3/19/13
to
scenes in movies that did not involve violence/abuse. I have no idea if
they were coerced into nudity on those.
David
Boron Elgar
Mar 19, 2013, 2:03:25 PM3/19/13
to
actresses. That is irrelevant. It is the depiction of violence and
abuse *within* the films chosen that is taken as tasteless when used
to make jokes.
Boron
David J. Martin
Mar 19, 2013, 2:07:36 PM3/19/13
to
when they didn't have to.
David
Lesmond
Mar 19, 2013, 3:17:29 PM3/19/13
to
On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, Alan J Rosenthal wrote:
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live reaction
>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are during
the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
Have any of the actresses mentioned complained?
--
If there's a nuclear winter, at least it'll snow.
Lesmond
Mar 19, 2013, 3:26:34 PM3/19/13
to
On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:12:27 -0500, Kevin wrote:
>On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:09:32 -0500, M C Hamster
><davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>>actually funny.
>>
>>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>>
>>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>>afraid.
>>
>>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
>
>I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
>seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
>and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
Otters: Worse than Seth MacFarlane.
>On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:09:32 -0500, M C Hamster
><davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>
>>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>>actually funny.
>>
>>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>>
>>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>>afraid.
>>
>>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
>
>I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
>seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
>and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
Otters: Worse than Seth MacFarlane.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 3:01:16 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:07:36 +0000 (UTC), David J. Martin
Which Boron implausibly thinks they did deliberately.
Writer: "OK, let's put in a reference to Charlize Theron's nude scene
in 'Cider House Rules' ."
MacFarlane: "Wait, hold on... had she been raped in that scene?"
Writer: "No, it was a post-coital love scene with Tobey Maguire."
MacFarlane: "No, no, that won't be funny! We need a reference to a
scene where she had been raped. We need as many references to scenes
where women had been brutalized as we can fit in, to make this a funny
song. Don't you understand?"
Writer: "Well, 'Cider House Rules' has the right number of syllables
for that place in the song, and that's why I chose it."
MacFarlane: "No, no, if there is a movie where Theron was raped, that
is the one we need to use."
Writer: "Well, OK, we can use 'Monster' then. I'll have to rewrite
part of the song to fit it in though."
MacFarlane: "OK, now we're talking FUNNY! See, using raped and
brutalized women gives this song exactly the cutting edge it needs, to
entertain those young males the Oscars wants to attract. Just
referring to boobs from love scenes isn't nearly shocking or tasteless
enough."
Writer: "Ah, ha ha, you're right, it's much better to deliberately
choose scenes where the woman had been raped, it DOES make the song
much funnier. I get it now."
Writer: "OK, let's put in a reference to Charlize Theron's nude scene
in 'Cider House Rules' ."
MacFarlane: "Wait, hold on... had she been raped in that scene?"
Writer: "No, it was a post-coital love scene with Tobey Maguire."
MacFarlane: "No, no, that won't be funny! We need a reference to a
scene where she had been raped. We need as many references to scenes
where women had been brutalized as we can fit in, to make this a funny
song. Don't you understand?"
Writer: "Well, 'Cider House Rules' has the right number of syllables
for that place in the song, and that's why I chose it."
MacFarlane: "No, no, if there is a movie where Theron was raped, that
is the one we need to use."
Writer: "Well, OK, we can use 'Monster' then. I'll have to rewrite
part of the song to fit it in though."
MacFarlane: "OK, now we're talking FUNNY! See, using raped and
brutalized women gives this song exactly the cutting edge it needs, to
entertain those young males the Oscars wants to attract. Just
referring to boobs from love scenes isn't nearly shocking or tasteless
enough."
Writer: "Ah, ha ha, you're right, it's much better to deliberately
choose scenes where the woman had been raped, it DOES make the song
much funnier. I get it now."
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 3:02:08 PM3/19/13
to
a long shot.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 3:07:30 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:17:29 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, Alan J Rosenthal wrote:
>
>>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>
>>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>
>>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>
>The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live reaction
>shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are during
>the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>
I saw someone say that on a bulletin board, but didn't imagine that
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, Alan J Rosenthal wrote:
>
>>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>
>>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>
>>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>
>The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live reaction
>shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are during
>the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>
was true. So did they take video of these actresses from, say, last
year's Oscar show and patch them into this video of MacFarlane? Or
are you saying that they conspired with MacFarlane on this number and
knew what he was planning to do? That would be really interesting if
that were the case.
>Have any of the actresses mentioned complained?
Fonda) but can't say if they were the same ones named in the song or
not.
S. Checker
Mar 19, 2013, 4:09:43 PM3/19/13
to
Kevin <K_S_O...@yh.com> wrote:
> And yes,
> I saw the video. But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
> is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
I can't actually think of a single worse thing that one could say about
an animated show.
--
SHE TOOK ON A WHOLE GANG! A howling hellcat humping a hot steel hog on a
roaring rampage of revenge!
-- Bury Me an Angel (1972)
> And yes,
> I saw the video. But I just don't find him funny, period. Family Guy
> is like a retarded version of South Park to me.
I can't actually think of a single worse thing that one could say about
an animated show.
--
SHE TOOK ON A WHOLE GANG! A howling hellcat humping a hot steel hog on a
roaring rampage of revenge!
-- Bury Me an Angel (1972)
S. Checker
Mar 19, 2013, 4:12:57 PM3/19/13
to
Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com> wrote:
> I did always think it was weird that in Sex and the City, S.J.P. always
> wore a bra during sex. My DH would probably complain if I wore
> underwear during The Act. Moreover, since all the other actresses
> stripped, it seemed to me that S.J.P. was just exerting her control over
> the show. Somedays, I'm glad I went into academia and IT, since
> stripping wasn't typically required. Requested, but not required.
I happened to see one of my favorite movies about movies, "State and
> I did always think it was weird that in Sex and the City, S.J.P. always
> wore a bra during sex. My DH would probably complain if I wore
> underwear during The Act. Moreover, since all the other actresses
> stripped, it seemed to me that S.J.P. was just exerting her control over
> the show. Somedays, I'm glad I went into academia and IT, since
> stripping wasn't typically required. Requested, but not required.
Main" the other night. It's a great commentary on the whole issue. And
features SJP.
--
But I stand on the shoulders of the people alongside whom I work. I also
keep my feet flat on the ground, my shoulder to the wheel, and my eyes
on the stars. It's a _very_ uncomfortable position.
M. Andrews, Monk
S. Checker
Mar 19, 2013, 4:13:54 PM3/19/13
to
Alan J Rosenthal <fl...@dgp.toronto.edu> wrote:
> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
> I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
> commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
> One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
> there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
> dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the reaction shots staged well
> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>
> I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
> commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>
> One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
> there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
> dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
before the actual event? As Jon Lovitz would say, "Acting!"
--
I have observed for example that we all get the same amount of ice. The
rich get it in the summertime and the poor get it in the winter.
-- Bat Masterson
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 5:33:07 PM3/19/13
to
"Lesmond" <les...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:yrfzbaqirevmbaar...@192.168.0.6...
> The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live
> reaction
> shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are
> during
> the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>
> Have any of the actresses mentioned complained?
That changes things I would say. I didn't realize they were pre-taped
reaction shots. And the actors were in on the joke.
news:yrfzbaqirevmbaar...@192.168.0.6...
> The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live
> reaction
> shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are
> during
> the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>
> Have any of the actresses mentioned complained?
reaction shots. And the actors were in on the joke.
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 5:50:07 PM3/19/13
to
"M C Hamster" <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:9bchk8pptuh5mr0l3...@4ax.com...
> Writer: "Ah, ha ha, you're right, it's much better to deliberately
> choose scenes where the woman had been raped, it DOES make the song
> much funnier. I get it now."
isn't Charlize Theron one of the pre-taped reaction shots, in on the joke?
"[after the show] Theron, 37, sipped on a drink and hung out with a small
group of friends at a table near the stage. She appeared to be in great
spirits while mingling with MacFarlane for a while, greeting him with a
giant hug. Theron also complimented him on a job well done."
http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/2013-oscars/charlize-theron-toasts-oscars-host-seth-macfarlane-private-194045743.html
"Oscar winner Charlize Theron and host Seth MacFarlane apparently really
clicked while prepping for Sunday's big show. Along with dancing in
MacFarlane's opening musical number, Theron also pre-taped one of the
reaction shots for his much-discussed "We Saw Your Boobs" bit, spoofing
famous actresses' topless or nude scenes in their films. According to folks
close to Theron, the South African native thinks MacFarlane is funny, cute
and charming. "Charlize finds Seth to be a great guy who not only makes her
laugh but has so much on the ball," said a longtime Hollywood insider who
has worked with Theron for years."
http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/zwecker/18453828-452/charlize-theron-seth-mcfarlane-hookup-at-the-oscars.html
news:9bchk8pptuh5mr0l3...@4ax.com...
> Writer: "Ah, ha ha, you're right, it's much better to deliberately
> choose scenes where the woman had been raped, it DOES make the song
> much funnier. I get it now."
"[after the show] Theron, 37, sipped on a drink and hung out with a small
group of friends at a table near the stage. She appeared to be in great
spirits while mingling with MacFarlane for a while, greeting him with a
giant hug. Theron also complimented him on a job well done."
http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/2013-oscars/charlize-theron-toasts-oscars-host-seth-macfarlane-private-194045743.html
"Oscar winner Charlize Theron and host Seth MacFarlane apparently really
clicked while prepping for Sunday's big show. Along with dancing in
MacFarlane's opening musical number, Theron also pre-taped one of the
reaction shots for his much-discussed "We Saw Your Boobs" bit, spoofing
famous actresses' topless or nude scenes in their films. According to folks
close to Theron, the South African native thinks MacFarlane is funny, cute
and charming. "Charlize finds Seth to be a great guy who not only makes her
laugh but has so much on the ball," said a longtime Hollywood insider who
has worked with Theron for years."
http://www.suntimes.com/entertainment/zwecker/18453828-452/charlize-theron-seth-mcfarlane-hookup-at-the-oscars.html
Lesmond
Mar 19, 2013, 9:31:04 PM3/19/13
to
Lesmond
Mar 19, 2013, 9:40:11 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:07:30 -0500, M C Hamster wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:17:29 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
><les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, Alan J Rosenthal wrote:
>>
>>>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>>
>>>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>>>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>>
>>>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>>>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>>>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>>
>>The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live reaction
>>shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are during
>>the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>>
>
>I saw someone say that on a bulletin board, but didn't imagine that
>was true.
They are dressed differently and sitting around different people.
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:17:29 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
><les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>On 19 Mar 2013 00:24:14 GMT, Alan J Rosenthal wrote:
>>
>>>M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>>
>>>I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>>>commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>>
>>>One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>>>there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>>>dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>>
>>The audience reaction shots were all pre-taped. They were not live reaction
>>shots. Note that the actresses are dressed differently than are are during
>>the live broadcast. They were in on the joke.
>>
>
>I saw someone say that on a bulletin board, but didn't imagine that
>was true.
So did they take video of these actresses from, say, last
>year's Oscar show and patch them into this video of MacFarlane? Or
>are you saying that they conspired with MacFarlane on this number and
>knew what he was planning to do? That would be really interesting if
>that were the case.
have no idea.
>>Have any of the actresses mentioned complained?
>
>I saw complaints from various actresses after the event (e.g., Jane
>Fonda) but can't say if they were the same ones named in the song or
>not.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 9:59:15 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:31:04 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
<les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:02:08 -0500, M C Hamster wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:26:34 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
>><les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:12:27 -0500, Kevin wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:09:32 -0500, M C Hamster
>>>><davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>>>>>actually funny.
>>>>>
>>>>>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>>>>>
>>>>>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>>>>>afraid.
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>>>>>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
>>>>
>>>>I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
>>>>seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
>>>>and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
>>>
>>>Otters: Worse than Seth MacFarlane.
>>
>>You aren't paying attention, Lesmond... that's apparently not true by
>>a long shot.
>
>I seem to be aligning myself with Satan here.
I know, me too. Well, let's at least strip, and enjoy the heat.
>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:02:08 -0500, M C Hamster wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:26:34 -0500 (EST), "Lesmond"
>><les...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 02:12:27 -0500, Kevin wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sun, 17 Mar 2013 23:09:32 -0500, M C Hamster
>>>><davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On 18 Mar 2013 02:04:28 GMT, Dover Beach <moon.b...@mail.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>But see, so does Jon Stewart, and he's
>>>>>>actually funny.
>>>>>
>>>>>I... gasp... agree!! Now we've finally got something to build on.
>>>>>
>>>>>I wish I could think of anything else I like. I'm stumped, I'm
>>>>>afraid.
>>>>>
>>>>>Oh... Florida canal otters! I liked seeing those. If you like
>>>>>otters, and Jon Stewart, well, now we're starting to get somewhere.
>>>>
>>>>I liked otters a lot until I read an article about them raping baby
>>>>seals to death. Then I decided I'd had enough internet for one day,
>>>>and that there was indeed such a thing as too much information.
>>>
>>>Otters: Worse than Seth MacFarlane.
>>
>>You aren't paying attention, Lesmond... that's apparently not true by
>>a long shot.
>
>I seem to be aligning myself with Satan here.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 10:05:58 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:13:54 -0400, spa...@gmail.com (S. Checker)
wrote:
>Alan J Rosenthal <fl...@dgp.toronto.edu> wrote:
>> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>
>> I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>> commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>
>> One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>> there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>> dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the reaction shots staged well
>before the actual event? As Jon Lovitz would say, "Acting!"
If the actresses giving the reactions are indeed wearing different
clothes than they wore at this year's Oscars, and Shatner was showing
MacFarlane a tape of the awful song he sang at this year's Oscars
where they wore this year's clothes, then what does that mean? Are we
supposed to be seeing their reactions to this clip at some Oscar show
that is not this year's show? Are we supposed to be seeing, maybe, a
future Oscar show where the actresses are reacting to seeing a video
of this year's awful show, being shown to them again? It's all so
meta.
wrote:
>Alan J Rosenthal <fl...@dgp.toronto.edu> wrote:
>> M C Hamster <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> writes:
>>>Please take a minute and actually watch it.
>>>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTKEDXNQAcc
>>
>> I can't believe you talked me in to watching that. I'm now about to
>> commence drinking heavily to attempt to forget it.
>>
>> One thing I noted in watching it which I haven't heard discussed is that
>> there were two actress reactions which showed they were really quite
>> dismayed and uncomfortable. (No surprise.)
>
>Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the reaction shots staged well
>before the actual event? As Jon Lovitz would say, "Acting!"
clothes than they wore at this year's Oscars, and Shatner was showing
MacFarlane a tape of the awful song he sang at this year's Oscars
where they wore this year's clothes, then what does that mean? Are we
supposed to be seeing their reactions to this clip at some Oscar show
that is not this year's show? Are we supposed to be seeing, maybe, a
future Oscar show where the actresses are reacting to seeing a video
of this year's awful show, being shown to them again? It's all so
meta.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 10:15:01 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 17:50:07 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
wrote:
Wow, that's really interesting, Gus. Yes, Theron is the one
displaying total disgust at her mention, and her film "Monster" is one
where she has been raped, so if anyone was angry at him, one would
have thought it would have been her.
wrote:
displaying total disgust at her mention, and her film "Monster" is one
where she has been raped, so if anyone was angry at him, one would
have thought it would have been her.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 10:22:50 PM3/19/13
to
interesting.
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 10:50:06 PM3/19/13
to
"M C Hamster" <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:m36ik8tcrsrg66l9t...@4ax.com...
> If the actresses giving the reactions are indeed wearing different
> clothes than they wore at this year's Oscars, and Shatner was showing
> MacFarlane a tape of the awful song he sang at this year's Oscars
> where they wore this year's clothes, then what does that mean? Are we
> supposed to be seeing their reactions to this clip at some Oscar show
> that is not this year's show? Are we supposed to be seeing, maybe, a
> future Oscar show where the actresses are reacting to seeing a video
> of this year's awful show, being shown to them again? It's all so
> meta.
He probably was showing clips from one of the multiverses. The actresses
didn't have goatees, did they?
Lesmond
Mar 19, 2013, 11:44:19 PM3/19/13
to
That we wish we had not so many clothes
So let's loosen up with a playful tease
Like all lovers did through the centuries
We're just following ancient history
If I strip for you will you strip for me?
We're just following ancient history
If I strip for you will you strip for me?
Uh-huh-huh
When it gets so hot the end of the day
You may find your clothes getting in the way
If a pretty dress hides your true desire
Fold it nice and slow, throw it on the fire"
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 10:52:36 PM3/19/13
to
"M C Hamster" <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:c07ik81e1srhmkcpj...@4ax.com...
juvenile, crass, somewhat tasteless and only occasionally funny-- but not
guilty.
Gus
Mar 19, 2013, 10:54:46 PM3/19/13
to
"M C Hamster" <davo...@nospam-speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:oq6ik8lnat6f46ogo...@4ax.com...
guilty.
M C Hamster
Mar 19, 2013, 10:54:22 PM3/19/13
to
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 22:52:36 -0400, "Gus" <Gus.O...@geemail.com>
Oh, now you're going to hell too, along with me and Lesmond. There's
plenty of room though, no problem.
plenty of room though, no problem.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages