Got to love a busy day at work.

Ok, my complaint is the use of children in the type written and even admitted by kidman. If she kissed him as a mother kisses her child that would be one thing, but, even without seeing it, that isn't the case. Take her own statement that she had not intended to do this in a film. Well, she did and it won't be the innocent type thing. I know folks in Europe are more open in ideas than some in America, myself included, but a line must be drawn. This far and no further. There is much in films these days that I find highly offensive, and the only thing I can do is refuse to see it and not give that company that made the film any of my money or support.

I find this idea in the film just as offensive as murdering children in films, though they is a lot of special effect and no child is physically harmed, but this, is to say that such ideas are acceptable. Yes, I am old fashion and happy with it. I would love to see films go back to a clean family based types, with good actors with morals. This is not to say people can't watch what they want, they will, obviously, but I won't support it or them. It is just one of those things that gets under my skin, like the honor killings that still go on.

Ends rant, and *shakes head and goes of to another room.*

you know FD i really do admire you even though I disagree with you, you're such a decent, honest, straighforward, bloke

Taw, thanks. Its like I said in another thread, we may not always agree, and thats ok. But gives us a chance to learn from one another, and I would not trade that for anything. Today was just a wierd day at work, and then running across that article. Children in the world have enough of their own things that turn thier lives upside down, without adults adding to it. Here in the US and more over in Ga. children are harmed so repeatedly by adults and parent, it just makes my blood boil.

That said, time to move on to other things. Like cleaniing house.

Hey Fd.... now that it would seem that his Taw-ness will be relieved of his nettlesome employment burdens, care to write up whatever the silliness/annoyance was today?

<Edit>

PS. I happen to find Nicole very very "interesting" so.... for admittedly prurient reasons, I kinda want to see this movie.

I missed her onstage in London...... And I can't get my wife interested in watching that Kubrick flick.

Edited by - Indy11 on 9/8/2004 6:32:47 PM

Just some management games where the manager, a woman, has qurks that hit at the wrong times. She seems to have a problem with the grounds girl and hinted that i should be giving her more work to do. Yes it's can be done, but she has work of her own to do. They had me running all over on roof leaks, 16 in all. I have been bugging them for a year and a half to get the buildings reroofed. They were built in 1888, an old cotton mill turned into apartments. the current roof is over 50 years old and leaks in hard rains.

Any way, I tent to defend those under me, even if it makes waves. I have been in property management 21 years, the manager has been in for about 1 year. This is not to say she can't manage, but that she tends to want to micro manage and that puches my button. I refuse to do that. If I can't trust those who work for me, they don't work for me. The girl is a very good worker, and the manager has even said so, which makes the whole thing a bigger mystery.

Edited by - Finalday on 9/8/2004 6:44:10 PM

Seems to me there's some story material here.... of a certain punchy comedy like genre.......

Uhm.... yeah.... I saw that on a headline earlier today. I wont judge the movie but being completely honest, I wont see it. Not judging a movie before you see it is all well and good, but how much different can the scene be from what it is described, a chick thats 37 kissing a 10 year old boy, well, I guess it depends on wether its a french kiss or not, and the bath-tub thing could be completely different (like a mother giving a child a bath) but in a romantic way, I truly find it appaling, sounds really.... uhm...... pedofile'ish to me. Not to be prudish at all, I have seen a lot of distasteful and messed up stuff in my lifetime, but what I honestly believe is their just pushing for notoriety. Some guy probably sat down and said "lets have nicole kidman kiss a 10 year old kid, so even if the movie sucks everyone will remember it" same as with many movies in the past, such as for example, that scene with I believe it was Sharon Stone in a movie. Or for example, the pie-sex scene from American Pie 1 . I believe its just a push to make the movie famous on the grounds off offensive content.

PS: And I do sincerely believe theres a world of different ways to show love rather than taking a bath and kissing people, to me these scenes sound more sexual than "love' oriented.

"I'm still an atheist, thank God."



Edited by - Comont54 on 9/8/2004 10:02:46 PM

Somehow I don't see paedophilia being as big a draw card as looking at sharon stones goodies, well not for me anyway. It really depends on the kiss itself though, I mean is it an innocent peck on the lips or a passionate tounge and all job? There is a huge difference, however if it was the latter then I would have to agree with my more prudish collegues. Personally I won't be seeing this movie, not because of the paedophillic undertones, but simply because it sounds like a crap movie....and that's my 2 cents.

Meh, it doesn't sound like my sort of movie. I don't necessarily agree with the content in question, but I'm not going to judge it... yet. Besides, let's see the context of the kiss, etc. Besides, at Taw said, Nabokov's "Lolita" is a classic, and isn't really seen as that controversial anymore despite its similar content. Double standards? Probably.

Esky, you stole my comparison.

but there seems to be some artistic merit in the film, and i'll probably see it, its probably something that isn't really offensive, and the clocks will tick, and the planets will turn, and Viator will be pissed as soon as school finishes. universal constants, and one film isnt gonna change it.

besides, if you don't like it, dont watch it! its as simple as that, but let others make up their own damn minds.
=:=
Vi

never fear, i, is here.

only just spotted this thread, reading through what alot of people have said, there seems to be distinct camps, there's the kneejer k, "im not watching this filth" crew,the "give it a watch before you make any decisions" crew and the "im not judging, this looks like ass" crew.

Personally, i find the premise of the film really interesting. It reminds me of that DS9 episode where Dax meets up with her previous life's wife and has the same feelings of love towards her, the episode culminates in them kissing, being the first on-screen lesbian kiss on American TV and, being hot for Terry Farrel, it got my vote.

This though, seems like its about the story than the actual scenes we've been told about. Evidently those scenes are the most explicit the film has to offer, but if we're talking about a love story between a woman and who she believes is her re-incarnated husband. Now whether this turns into a film dealing with a womans grief over the death of him and she looses rational thought, or it develops into some weird fantasy film where it turns out to be true or whatever, we KNOW that its going to focus around this so over time, the relationship between the two will grow. If the scriptwriters and directors are worth their salt (written by the guy who wrote oscar winner Monsters Ball and directed by Radiohead & Blur music video director (iffy) and Sexy Beast) then its going to be dealt with seriously and progressively so its not going to be some gratuitous scene, but that the audience is going to understand the motives for the scene.

I think its incredibly brave to make a film of this nature, its clearly a social hot potatoe and, while not comparing it to but drawing similarities to, like Brass Eye's Paedophile episode, even its a really crap film after watching it, isnt the whole process of de-tabooing the whole thing worthwhile at the very least ?

I just watched the trailer for the film and it does look very interesting, it seem that the kid is the one who claims to be nicole's dead husband, she just wants to get on with her life, which adds a new spin on things somewhat. It echoes Mathilda's infatuation for Leon in Leon which many regard as "sweet" as opposed to anything more insidious. Its wise to let this play out before burning it for its crimes against humanity.

Edited by - Arcon on 9/9/2004 5:31:44 AM

well done, Will

thanks dad

---

"I read the script and it immediately affected me. There was something in this woman I felt I understood and knew," she said.
"I responded to this woman who was in mourning. It wasn't that I wanted to make a film where I kiss a 10-year-old boy."

---

another news article

old person kissing the little boy? i wonder how they got him to agree to it.. or reduce the trauma or soemthing.

but im more interested in why the old person is calling the young person.. nicole iirc, a beginner, 'no matter how old she may be'. i dont know anything about these celebrity stuff, but is that supported? agreed by the general public? sounds like granny is dissing the actress.