Boondock Saints

[cambraceres]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a carnival in my town right now and it's absolutley astounding how little fathers will allow their daugthters to wear. It' also astounding to just what extent they will ignore my gawking. I got lost last night because of tunnel vision induced by a young girl who accidentally wore her little sisters shorts or something.


[/ QUOTE ]
Was anyone else expecting him to use irreverent in the correct context in this random tangent?

[/ QUOTE ]

I like you pudge

And for the rest of you watching this thread within a thread highjack, I mean that the word irreverent by it's definition induces ideas of the subject entity being in a state of careless rebellion, a thing to do as it will without regard for the current order of things. In other words, to be irreverent, one must possess a lack of reverence for some thing, the subject entity. In the case of a movie, being irreverent of the pervading cinematic atmosphere is a requisite of making any classic film. You must go against the grain in that sense. So, in this way I see irreverent as the worst possible adjective to use when speaking of art. Doesn't anyone else notice this near criminal butchery of an otherwise meaningful word?

When I said those who understand semantic construction and proper usage don't use the word often, I was commenting on how few situations we speak of which require that exact concept. TO speak of a person as irreverent is a different matter altogether.

And I enjoyed Boondock Saints, not really on a cerebral level, but rather as a showcase for richly articulated characters playing out vivid scenes of violence and philistine vulgarity.

Cam

[otnemem]

OMG, the self-indulgence of that post is dripping on to this one.

[ QUOTE ]
In the case of a movie, being irreverent of the pervading cinematic atmosphere is a requisite of making any classic film.

[/ QUOTE ]
No it's not, and that's why your argument falls apart.

EDIT: No mention of "the pervading cinematic atmosphere" was even made in respect to "irreverent." He could have meant irreverent toward the current social atmosphere, previous film norms, etc.

[cambraceres]

[ QUOTE ]
OMG, the self-indulgence of that post is dripping on to this one.

[ QUOTE ]
In the case of a movie, being irreverent of the pervading cinematic atmosphere is a requisite of making any classic film.

[/ QUOTE ]
No it's not, and that's why your argument falls apart.

EDIT: No mention of "the pervading cinematic atmosphere" was even made in respect to "irreverent." He could have meant irreverent toward the current social atmosphere, previous film norms, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just wrong, and what do you mean self-indulgent?

I really want to know what you mean, but instead of engaging in a vitriolic tirade, I'll address your ill concieved idea.

No movie can be considered a classic unless it was a challenging work, not a cookie-cutter production. Go ahead and debate me on the point that great movies push the envelope. They do, they challenge norms and present issues in new ways, and with new attendent opinions. To say that a movie bears these characteristics is to say that it is exactly what I said: Irreverent to the pervading cinematic atmosphere. No 3:50 pop song is going to match he best of Jimi. Making a perfect Hitchcock-esque production will establish you as a copycat, even though these types pf films were cutting edge in their day, not cookie-cutter.

I'll stop, just tell me how I'm wrong here.

I'll not be on for some days, my weekends are not weekends and as such I will have no chance for debate with you fine folks.

Cam

[otnemem]

Your not being able to identify how that post was self-indulgent speaks volumes to your ego.

Thinking of good films of the last few years, the movie Shattered Glass, about Steven Glass, was a great movie. It wasn't irreverent in any manner. I'm not sure that Boondock Saints was ever identified as a "classic" in this thread.

[Capt. Busto]

lol @ all the non-Irish who don't understand the appeal of this movie.

[otnemem]

[ QUOTE ]
lol @ all the non-Irish who don't understand the appeal of this movie.

[/ QUOTE ]
Are you classifying all Irish people as having bad taste in movies?

[Rushmore]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
OMG, the self-indulgence of that post is dripping on to this one.

[ QUOTE ]
In the case of a movie, being irreverent of the pervading cinematic atmosphere is a requisite of making any classic film.

[/ QUOTE ]
No it's not, and that's why your argument falls apart.

EDIT: No mention of "the pervading cinematic atmosphere" was even made in respect to "irreverent." He could have meant irreverent toward the current social atmosphere, previous film norms, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just wrong, and what do you mean self-indulgent?

I really want to know what you mean, but instead of engaging in a vitriolic tirade, I'll address your ill concieved idea.

No movie can be considered a classic unless it was a challenging work, not a cookie-cutter production. Go ahead and debate me on the point that great movies push the envelope. They do, they challenge norms and present issues in new ways, and with new attendent opinions. To say that a movie bears these characteristics is to say that it is exactly what I said: Irreverent to the pervading cinematic atmosphere. No 3:50 pop song is going to match he best of Jimi. Making a perfect Hitchcock-esque production will establish you as a copycat, even though these types pf films were cutting edge in their day, not cookie-cutter.

I'll stop, just tell me how I'm wrong here.

I'll not be on for some days, my weekends are not weekends and as such I will have no chance for debate with you fine folks.

Cam

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, when I used the word in the first place, it was done so tongue-in-cheek. Did you not sense the fact that at that point, I was referring to how OTHER PEOPLE seemed to perceive the film? If I'd have said "feelgood event of the summer," would it have been easier for you to grasp?

Secondly, you have some peculiar ideas both about how this word is used and about what qualifies a film as "classic" or "great."

To categorically state that a movie must be "irreverent" to become "classic" is just plain silly.

I was going to go on and on a bit here, but have decided against it.

Happy Independence Day.

[Twistofsin]

I'm not a big fan of action films but I enjoyed this one a lot.

Anyone have an opinion on Things To Do In Denver When Your Dead? That was a favorite for awhile.

[brandofo]

[ QUOTE ]
It's popular because it makes Irish-Americans look like heroes instead of wife-beating drunkards from the Somalia of Europe.

[/ QUOTE ]
Racist BAN!?

[J.A.K.]

BOONDOCK SAINTS IS A GOOD MOVIE- movies are meant for entertainment, it delivers. There's a lot of unnecessary "I'm more pensive than most" bulls*** going on here.

Let me guess...you guys hated the first Diehard as well?



"Your what, bitch? I'll shoot myself
in the head, you can tell me that
cats name!"