Movies - The Case for Violence, Sex, Gore, and other things In Your Movies

[SethRex]

Question: Do movies NEED to be violent, bloody, and vulgar in language? Yes? No? Explain.

[Mandalorian]

Context dictates content. If the story calls for it, or the filmmakers want to include it, then sure. Some go overboard, some use it sparingly.

[SethRex]

Originally Posted by Mandalorian

Context dictates content. If the story calls for it, or the filmmakers want to include it, then sure. Some go overboard, some use it sparingly.

Good answer. I can understand that.

[jhan8185]

Originally Posted by Mandalorian

Context dictates content. If the story calls for it, or the filmmakers want to include it, then sure. Some go overboard, some use it sparingly.

This. Aside from this quote, in my opinion 99% of sexual scenes are absolutely unnecessary.

[singhcr]

Originally Posted by Mandalorian

Context dictates content. If the story calls for it, or the filmmakers want to include it, then sure. Some go overboard, some use it sparingly.

Pretty much this.

[78deluxe]

Originally Posted by SethRex

Question: Do movies NEED to be violent, bloody, and vulgar in language? Yes? No? Explain.

Need is a really strong implication. Thousands of films pre1960 didn't need graphic displays of any of those things. And many film makers and critics would argue some of the greatest films ever made during this time without them.

Even modern day, look at Pixar and other family friendly productions to understand a great story and production are possible without those things.

Violence can be implied without seeing it, frequently to great effect. And vulgar language isn't usually an intellectual driving force behind well written story telling.

Not suggesting they don't have a place in many films of various subject matter, but "need" for an effective movie? Clearly disproven by anyone that has delved into the history of cinema.

[dallywhitty]

The more, the merrier.

[SethRex]

Originally Posted by 78deluxe

Need is a really strong implication. Thousands of films pre1960 didn't need graphic displays of any of those things. And many film makers and critics would argue some of the greatest films ever made during this time without them.

Even modern day, look at Pixar and other family friendly productions to understand a great story and production are possible without those things.

Violence can be implied without seeing it, frequently to great effect. And vulgar language isn't usually an intellectual driving force behind well written story telling.

Not suggesting they don't have a place in many films of various subject matter, but "need" for an effective movie? Clearly disproven by anyone that has delved into the history of cinema.

Congratulations, you've just made my point I was simply asking this question, as a counter to the people who want their movies to be R-Rated and such. Like the New Hellboy movie is going for the R-Rating.

[Monterey Jack]

I can see an R-rated movie at the theater in the afternoon and a G-rated one at home in the evening, and enjoy both equally. A good movie is a good movie, regardless of what the MPAA says, and those who blanket-diss PG-13 movies as being somehow "compromised" are just being picky as hell.

[L.J.]

Depends on the subject matter. Some films story call for a lot of violence. No Country for Old Men wouldn't work with out its quick violent parts. Same with blood it is needed in excess in cases like a war film or horrror in some cases. Although both can be done well with out. Again goes back to the kind of story being told. For as real vulgar films like comedies I tend to stay away from, but sometimes its works to like Wolf of Wall Street.

[78deluxe]

Originally Posted by L.J.

No Country for Old Men wouldn't work with out its quick violent parts.

Excellent film. However, I'm 100% confident that it could have still been a great film with the violence either implied or toned down in the depiction.

It was well written and told story.

How about the scene towards the end of the film, violence is implied when "he" shows up at the house. You still know what happened, right?

[sandman slim]

Originally Posted by 78deluxe

Excellent film. However, I'm 100% confident that it could have still been a great film with the violence either implied or toned down in the depiction.

I'm about halfway convinced movies like this need to be more violent. People see John McClane or Rambo hit somebody in the head with a table & think it looks cool. Then they get in a fight in real life & end up in jail for manslaughter because the first punch knocked the other guy to the floor & cracked his skull. People go on and on about the violence in movies being irresponsible, but I think the lack of consequences is far more irresponsible.

[sandman slim]

Originally Posted by Monterey Jack

I can see an R-rated movie at the theater in the afternoon and a G-rated one at home in the evening, and enjoy both equally.

Reminds me of one of my favorite days in a theater: Wanted & Wall-E back to back, opening day. (Got a bit of a strange look from the ticket seller.) Both movies were exactly what they needed to be, no reason to water one down or spice the other one up. Never really have understood this fascination with ratings...

[Monterey Jack]

Originally Posted by sandman slim

Reminds me of one of my favorite days in a theater: Wanted & Wall-E back to back, opening day. (Got a bit of a strange look from the ticket seller.) Both movies were exactly what they needed to be, no reason to water one down or spice the other one up. Never really have understood this fascination with ratings...

Heh, I remember seeing Up and Drag Me To Hell on a double-feature. And, fifteen years ago, I saw Lilo & Stitch and Minority Report on the same day (both released on my birthday ).

[imsounoriginal]

I can live without sex and gore in my movies, but ultimately as long as the story/characters/storytelling are good, I don't really care.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by imsounoriginal

I can live without sex and gore in my movies, but ultimately as long as the story/characters/storytelling are good, I don't really care.

This. 100%. I think too often, movies use this stuff as a way to shock the audience but usualy it ends up just being gratuitous and does NOT push the narrative forward. There is some truth in that when you dont show everything that its actually scarier.

For sex? Same here - if it helps show characters love which leads to development then great. If its there just to treeange boys can wank it...then no.

[Rodney-2187]

Zero censorship and zero regulations on content. If you don't like it then don't watch it. If you think it is excessive then don't watch it. Censor and regulate yourself, not everyone else. I don't want someone using their opinion as the standard for the rest of us. Everything isn't meant to be catered to you. Some things are for others.

[Hellraiserfan]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Zero censorship and zero regulations on content. If you don't like it then don't watch it. If you think it is excessive then don't watch it. Censor and regulate yourself, not everyone else. I don't want someone using their opinion as the standard for the rest of us. Everything isn't meant to be catered to you. Some things are for others.

[s2mikey]

Originally Posted by rodneyfaile

Zero censorship and zero regulations on content. If you don't like it then don't watch it. If you think it is excessive then don't watch it. Censor and regulate yourself, not everyone else. I don't want someone using their opinion as the standard for the rest of us. Everything isn't meant to be catered to you. Some things are for others.

Well, that sounds good but are you OK with a film that perpetrates and celebrates raping children then? Serious question.

[Batmon77]

Originally Posted by s2mikey

Well, that sounds good but are you OK with a film that perpetrates and celebrates raping children then? Serious question.

Context......context.

U can roll out any social taboo.

Platoon.