| Author |
 Topic  |
|
GHcool 
"Forever a curious character."
|
 Posted - 03/07/2006 : 04:10:17
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sean
My views on this are absolutely clear-cut so here they are.
I agree with Sean in a political sense. That is, if anyone wants to make an offensive joke, they should be allowed to (except that on this site, you have to pass Benj's rather lenient stance on what has not yet "crossed the line" because this is his site after all). But if Sean or anyone else for that matter feels like making an offensive joke, it is their right to make that and I support that whole heartedly.
On the other hand, offensive jokes, by definition, break social rules and are therefore considered "rude" and, as Sean said, risk being judged perhaps unfairly, but just as likely fairly. To put it another way, I think everyone has a right to call their boss's mother a "fucking whore" to their boss's face, but if and when they get fired from their job, they shouldn't be surprised.
Now if you and your boss are friendly and comfortable with each other, as we are on this website, and you know your boss has an off color sense of humor, as many of us do on this website, and you are sure that you are not crossing any boundaries with your boss enough to get him insulted enough to fire you, then I don't see any reason why not to make off color jokes. The key word is "off color" as opposed to "offensive." |
Edited by - GHcool on 03/07/2006 06:28:24 |
 |
|
|
thefoxboy 
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 04:49:37
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
quote:
Originally posted by Sean
My views on this are absolutely clear-cut so here they are.
I agree with Sean in a political sense. That is, if anyone wants to make an offensive joke, they should be allowed to (except that on this site, you have to pass Benj's rather lenient stance on what has not yet "crossed the line" because this is his site after all). But if Sean or anyone else for that matter feels like making an offensive joke, it is their right to make that and I support that whole heartedly.
On the other hand, offensive jokes, by definition, break social rules and are therefore considered "rude" and, as Sean said, risk being judged perhaps unfairly, but just as likely fairly. To put it another way, I think everyone has a wife to call their boss's mother a "fucking whore" to their boss's face, but if and when they get fired from their job, they shouldn't be surprised.
Now if you and your boss are friendly and comfortable with each other, as we are on this website, and you know your boss has an off color sense of humor, as many of us do on this website, and you are sure that you are not crossing any boundaries with your boss enough to get him insulted enough to fire you, then I don't see any reason why not to make off color jokes. The key word is "off color" as opposed to "offensive."
Seeing that you mention wife and boss in the same sentence. My boss's wife keeps sending me porn emails, does that make my boss's wife a "fucking whore" too?   |
Edited by - thefoxboy on 03/07/2006 04:50:27 |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 04:56:48
|
Yep I agree with GHcool. There's a good article here on the recent infamous Mohammed cartoons. Here's a statement from it that I like:-
But what does respect mean? When I visit a mosque, I show my respect by taking off my shoes. I follow the customs, just as I do in a church, synagogue or other holy place. But if a believer demands that I, as a nonbeliever, observe his taboos in the public domain, he is not asking for my respect, but for my submission.
So I suppose that means that whatever benj allows here is OK. Sounds fine to me.
I suppose the way I look at it, if I come up with a controversial review that I think might be funny for 10 people and unpleasant for 10 people here, I won't submit it, but if I think it's funny for 50 and unpleasant for one, then I will submit, and it's tough for the one who doesn't like it. |
|
|
|
GHcool
"Forever a curious character."
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 06:30:16
|
quote:
Originally posted by thefoxboy
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
quote:
Originally posted by Sean
My views on this are absolutely clear-cut so here they are.
On the other hand, offensive jokes, by definition, break social rules and are therefore considered "rude" and, as Sean said, risk being judged perhaps unfairly, but just as likely fairly. To put it another way, I think everyone has a wife to call their boss's mother a "fucking whore" to their boss's face, but if and when they get fired from their job, they shouldn't be surprised.
Seeing that you mention wife and boss in the same sentence. My boss's wife keeps sending me porn emails, does that make my boss's wife a "fucking whore" too?
Whoops. That was a typo. I changed the original post.  |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 07:45:38
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
Whoops. That was a typo. I changed the original post.
I think foxy knows that. He was just being a tosser.  |
|
|
|
turrell
"Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh Ohhhh "
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 07:55:48
|
| I think the fictional nature of this story makes it an easier target than say Schindler's List or Amistad, etc. Interesting if you look at reviews for the Laramie Project, the reviews are very respectful - perhaps because it is a true story. |
|
|
|
Yukon 
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 14:49:45
|
Here's the challenge: Write a clever Brokeback review that has nothing to do with gay sex.
Here's what I came up with.
The movie is based on a story by Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Annie Proulx. It's about cowboys whose affair begins during a summer in the mountains while herding sheep.
Therefore: "Proulx: Herders She Wrote"
(Murder She Wrote was a popular TV show in North America starring Angela Landsbury. I don't know if it was a big hit in Singapore or Israel)
Feel free to tap that review here:
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?sort=2&id=8668&Mode=&Rows=100&Start=1&do=
|
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 15:12:39
|
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
Here's the challenge: Write a clever Brokeback review that has nothing to do with gay sex.
Here's what I came up with.
The movie is based on a story by Pulitzer Prize-winning writer Annie Proulx. It's about cowboys whose affair begins during a summer in the mountains while herding sheep.
Therefore: "Proulx: Herders She Wrote"
(Murder She Wrote was a popular TV show in North America starring Angela Landsbury. I don't know if it was a big hit in Singapore or Israel)
Feel free to tap that review here:
http://www.fwfr.com/display.asp?sort=2&id=8668&Mode=&Rows=100&Start=1&do=
That's a very good one, and I've voted for it! If I take you up on the challenge, I'll let you know what I come up with and if its accepted.
As for your question, here in Israel we had all the old "Murder, She Wrote" re-runs on until very recently. It was a wonderful Saturday afternoon viewing - old "Remmington Steele", old "Murphy Brown" and old "Murder, She Wrote"! Ah, the bliss.
|
Edited by - ChocolateLady on 03/07/2006 15:15:55 |
|
|
|
RockGolf
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 03/07/2006 : 16:02:18
|
Interesting take. Given that Annie Proulx's most popular novel was "The Shipping News" (Kevin Spacey was in the movie version), how about "The Sheeping News"? (Too late, I've already submitted it.) BTW, my top-voted "Homo On the Range" review for the film was submitted the day the project was announced and seemed destined to be a realllllly bad idea from the director of "Hulk". Who knew?
I'm also surprised no one has connected this film to the rather popular (on FWFR) "Out In Nature: Homosexual Behaviour In The Animal Kingdom". I've submitted "Brokeback Mountain Lions".
(And in a not dissimilar vein, may I recommend Dalmac's review of "Touching The Void"? Wish I'd thought of it first.) |
Edited by - RockGolf on 03/07/2006 16:11:23 |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 07:58:16
|
Okay - I've taken up your challenge. I've succeeded in getting my review "Proulx's 'impossible love' Western" accepted for Brokeback, which isn't all that clever, but it doesn't go into sex. The MERPs didn't want two others I thought were more clever, so I've revised them and submitted them again. They are (now, awaiting MERPs next look):
"Western storms: internal, heated" which referrs to Ang's "Ice Storm" which was an external and cold storm. I don't have high hopes for this one since I wanted to put 'Ang' into the review but the MERPs rejected "Ang's Western storm, internal".
and
"Contemporary, realistic, Western Ang(st)" which I think is the cleverest of my reviews. Think of it.
Contemporary: All of Ang's other films have been set in another time period ("Ice Storm" is set in the 70s), but this one goes from the not too distant past into the present. Its also the only one about a contemporary issue - homosexuality and homophobia.
Realistic: All his other films have used at least some CGI, if not a whole lot of CGI as a major part of the film. Also, none of his ohter films are about real-life situations or people or things - even the Ice Storm isn't something people encounter every day.
Western: Not one of Ang's films was ever set in Western USA before.
Ang(st): Its an Ang movie which has no small amount of ANGST!
(Well, I thought it was clever and I hope the MERPs get it.)
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 08:35:50
|
OK, CL, you were asking for someone to comment on your declined reviews, weren't you? 
The first one "Western storms: internal, heated" I think is a goner. Simply because it's not correct (well, I haven't seen the movie, so a bit of a guess on my part). Are there heated, internal storms in the West in that movie? I suspect not. So it's not correct. I've no idea what an internal storm is, or a heated storm (a storm in the tropics I suppose could be heated). Secondly, even if there were storms in the movie it's still generic, as how many Westerns have storms?
The second one "Contemporary, realistic, Western Ang(st)" I would have understood even without the explanation, as it seems quite specific to that movie. I.e., a Western involving someone/something named Ang. I can only think of Ang Lee's only Western anyway (Brokeback). Also, the first two words aren't even necessary, you could even shorten it to "Western Ang(st)" and make an even better review (that's just my opinion, I have a liking for one or two word reviews rather than the verbose four-wordage that many here seem to like ) and in my view it would still be specific to that movie.
I'd say the second one should be fine with an explanation, perhaps whoever processed it missed the 'Ang' bit. |
|
|
|
ChocolateLady
"500 Chocolate Delights"
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 10:19:19
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sean
OK, CL, you were asking for someone to comment on your declined reviews, weren't you?
Well, no, actually. I understand why they were declined the first time. What I wrote about here were the revised versions which hadn't yet been through the MERP mill.
quote:
The first one "Western storms: internal, heated" I think is a goner. Simply because it's not correct (well, I haven't seen the movie, so a bit of a guess on my part). Are there heated, internal storms in the West in that movie? I suspect not. So it's not correct. I've no idea what an internal storm is, or a heated storm (a storm in the tropics I suppose could be heated). Secondly, even if there were storms in the movie it's still generic, as how many Westerns have storms?
Yes, well... agreed. Its quite a stretch and I knew it from the get-go. Anyway, they declined this version too, and I've deleted it.
quote:
The second one "Contemporary, realistic, Western Ang(st)" I would have understood even without the explanation, as it seems quite specific to that movie. I.e., a Western involving someone/something named Ang. I can only think of Ang Lee's only Western anyway (Brokeback). Also, the first two words aren't even necessary, you could even shorten it to "Western Ang(st)" and make an even better review (that's just my opinion, I have a liking for one or two word reviews rather than the verbose four-wordage that many here seem to like ) and in my view it would still be specific to that movie.
I'd say the second one should be fine with an explanation, perhaps whoever processed it missed the 'Ang' bit.
Well, this verbose, four-word version has now been accepted by the MERPs, so I'm pleased. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 10:38:26
|
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Well, no, actually. I understand why they were declined the first time. What I wrote about here were the revised versions which hadn't yet been through the MERP mill.
Ah, sorry, I missed the bit where you said they had been edited. |
|
|
|
RockGolf
"1500+ reviews. 1 joke."
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 14:47:03
|
My "Sheeping News" review has now been approved and is ready to accept your votes, should you be so inclined.
Not that there's anything wrong with that. |
|
|
|
Yukon
"Co-editor of FWFR book"
|
Posted - 03/08/2006 : 15:42:00
|
Sheeping News and Western Ang(st) got my vote. I think they're both clever.
Choco, I'm with Sean, Western Ang(st) without the two other words is a better review.
But you still got my vote
("Irregular entry into Ledger", is the best FWR review for Brokeback. I don't think there is anything homophobic about that.)
|
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
Are some 'Brokeback Mountain' reviews homophobic?
