Spanex wrote:back at you!
Also regarding Nimh I actually only watched it once when I was about 7 o3o But I do remember bits

Spanex wrote:back at you!


Or because it was badly paced, visually dull, and shot and acted in a style completely at odds with its subject matter. The way in which you boiled down the film’s polarising qualities to the retarded paedophilic romance – literal description! – suggests that you liked it for political reasons rather than cinematic ones. I consider Terry Gilliam to be one of the very best directors of all time, but Tideland is a bad film – there’s no question about it. I recommend Stanley Kubrick’s Lolita and Guillermo del Toro’s Pan’s Labyrinth – much better films which deal with the same themes.RayFan9876 wrote:Great movie; you'll either love it because of the way it explored the minds of the two so in depth and well, or you'll despise it with everything you can, because you don't find this kind of material acceptable.

I disagree. The way it was shot I found very immersing. My "odd" reasoning I suppose is, since the movie was explored through the eyes of the little girl, it almost felt like the wondering camera was her wondering mind. It's vague, but that's immediately and subconsciously how I saw it.spiraldoor wrote:Or because it was badly paced, visually dull, and shot and acted in a style completely at odds with its subject matter.
I know, and that's exactly why I found it so interesting. Though the paedophilia concept is debatable, because while he's physically an adult, he mentally isn't. There isn't exactly clarification as to which it takes into account, but judging from your usual outlook on this sort of thing, I would say that you are fairly strictly set on it being physical, whereas I am not.spiraldoor wrote:The way in which you boiled down the film’s polarising qualities to the retarded paedophilic romance – literal description!
I disagree, and given your viewpoint, I entirely understand why you think it's such a bad film, and many, many people share that same viewpoint.spiraldoor wrote:but Tideland is a bad film – there’s no question about it.

It doesn’t matter if it was physical; romantic relationships between grown men and prepubescent children are not acceptable under any circumstances. However, this had no impact on whether I liked the film; the central relationship in Lolita is also wrong, but at least it’s got a quality film attached to it.RayFan9876 wrote:I know, and that's exactly why I found it so interesting. Though the paedophilia concept is debatable, because while he's physically an adult, he mentally isn't. There isn't exactly clarification as to which it takes into account, but judging from your usual outlook on this sort of thing, I would say that you are fairly strictly set on it being physical, whereas I am not.

I haven't seen Lolita, so I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about. I'll check it out, and maybe I will like it more than Tideland. By no means am I calling this movie a masterpiece, but the certain aspects it explored I feel it did masterfully.spiraldoor wrote:It doesn’t matter if it was physical; romantic relationships between grown men and prepubescent children are not acceptable under any circumstances. However, this had no impact on whether I liked the film; the central relationship in Lolita is also wrong, but at least it’s got a quality film attached to it.

Love it. Seriously.Phoenixan wrote:Waiting for me to make a game?
Well, it's not the game you want, but I made a game called Palin Zone last week, and it's had a few thousand plays/visits (according to my web host).
CHECK IT OUT

That is brilliant. Now make us dodge her words.Phoenixan wrote:Waiting for me to make a game?
Well, it's not the game you want, but I made a game called Palin Zone last week, and it's had a few thousand plays/visits (according to my web host).
CHECK IT OUT

Virtual boy attacks againPhoenixan wrote:Waiting for me to make a game?
Well, it's not the game you want, but I made a game called Palin Zone last week, and it's had a few thousand plays/visits (according to my web host).
CHECK IT OUT

Oh thanks.Shrooblord wrote:Just discovered this link in Rulez' signature. My soul has now merged with the pure essence of roflol.


Well, I go by two names, and Bingham is one of them (it's not official, but I use it with people I don't know personally). And yes, that is me, and I took part in writing some of the second episode.Shrooblord wrote:It's funny man! So crude and just 'droog', if ya know what I mean. Did RayFan have any part in this (seeing as you keep calling her Bningham all the time now, I assumed the character is also her)?
k, you may ass well watch this bonus episode http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrcooaVGCpUShrooblord wrote:It's funny man! So crude and just 'droog', if ya know what I mean. Did RayFan have any part in this (seeing as you keep calling her Bningham all the time now, I assumed the character is also her)?