Movies that OFFEND you

[Konata Izumi]

Copied from Gallifrey Base. Offensive place btw. No etiquette.

I like action blockbusters about, this fun term I heard if sexist "***k waving", but lately I've felt there's always something offensive. The Last Stand: patronising poster. A Good Day to Die Hard: in UK cut. G.I. Joe: Retaliation: misogyny. Iron Man 3&G.I. Joe: ill-fittingly oversweet 3d. All of them: NOT GOOD ENOUGH! Fast & Furious 6: this was actually good enough, but the seemingly intelligent and stylish characters never do anything intelligent; it gives these yolo criminals a better name which I like, but shows intelligent action non-supportable.

Lars von Trier and the slightly less famous Hideaki Anno on the other hand have never offended me, even when they do something that's lacking. Maybe it's because they have nihilist worldviews, their movies promote less lamentable illusions of doom.

Even my own 6-minute masterpiece has a lamentable disregard for aesthetic tone; it hurts the senses.

 

[JirinPanthosa]

Misogyny bothers me more in realistic films than it does in action films. Action films are supposed to be about male bravado, so IMO they get a pass.

The films that bug me are the sort of films that pretend to be progressive when really they are preaching super-conservative values. Things like Friends With Kids, No Strings Attached. Where the premise is something modern and forward thinking, but then the conclusion is that no, it's impossible to really have anything except a traditional family and traditional meaning of sex.

Then there are hypocritical movies that are about not judging people superficially, when they're really about WOMEN not judging MEN superficially. So the ugly man gets the beautiful woman but the ugly woman never gets the handsome man.

 

[DevilEyes]

Rules of Engagement. From the ethical standpoint, one of the most disgusting movies ever made. Basically, the message is that a soldier is allowed to kill a bunch of civilians and that nobody should held him accountable for it, since, hey, he has it tough doing his job, OK? And that only other soldiers can understand him and will necessarily excuse him, while the lowly civilians have no right judging him for his war crimes.

 

[Konata Izumi]

Misogyny bothers me more in realistic films than it does in action films. Action films are supposed to be about male bravado, so IMO they get a pass.

Then they'd have to be against non-macho male characters too.

Also there were 2 tough chick characters in Fast & Furious 6.

The films that bug me are the sort of films that pretend to be progressive when really they are preaching super-conservative values. Things like Friends With Kids, No Strings Attached. Where the premise is something modern and forward thinking, but then the conclusion is that no, it's impossible to really have anything except a traditional family and traditional meaning of sex.

Jagten/The Hunt, and other similar stories, can be a bit sad how all emphasis is on, how innocent people are being affected by societal punishment, as if, if the guy was guilty, then it'd be all ok.

 

[Greg Cox]

"Offend" is too strong a word, but I tend to be irked by movies like "Sweet Home Alabama" that suggest that small-town, salt-of-the-earth, country folk are somehow purer and more decent than those snobby, over-educated city slickers . . . .

I'm an ex-New Yorker and proud of it.

 

[DevilEyes]

Jagten/The Hunt, and other similar stories, can be a bit sad how all emphasis is on, how innocent people are being affected by societal punishment, as if, if the guy was guilty, then it'd be all ok.

Now how and based on what did you get to this amazing conclusion? Reading the mind of the writers/director? Deleted scene where the director appeared to announce that it would be OK if he were guilty? Do you know something we don't?

 

[Prince of Space]

I'm rarely offended by a movie, certainly not when one presents a different worldview than mine, be it political, religious or some other. I guess I do feel a little bothered when a film goes out of its way to mock a person or group. Why is that necessary? Just present your view and let people decide. But, even then, I get over the offense pretty quickly.

 

[Ain Jalut]

Things to Come. I don't know about the book, but the movie glorified fascism.

 

[stj]

The ones that really get under my skin are either the epic falsifications, malignant mythmaking movies like The Birth of a Nation or Gone With the Wind, or the really topical ones that lie about current affairs, things like Zero Dark Thirty.

Things like Monster (about Aileen Wuornos) or Pain & Gain, are not precisely offensive but really, really creepy. Not least because they didn't seem so while you were first watching them.

 

[RandyS]

I find the current trend of going through life looking for things to be offended by to be offensive.

 

[DalekJim]

Don't get offended by racism, sexism, homophobia etc. Triumph if the Will and Birth of the Nation are amazing films to watch.

What offends me, is any film with an anti-intellectual agenda. Any film that portrays the act of thinking as something horrid and to be ashamed of. Forrest Gump is a good, literal example but most action blockbusters fall for it too. See, JJ Abrams Star Trek.

 

[Konata Izumi]

What offends me, is any film with an anti-intellectual agenda. Any film that portrays the act of thinking as something horrid and to be ashamed of. Forrest Gump is a good, literal example but most action blockbusters fall for it too. See, JJ Abrams Star Trek.

I tried stopping thinking once for a long time. All the bad things stayed and good things left. Can't say how the opposite works. Would it really, almost ever, burn the mind? Bureaucracies seem to be how they are because of a collective lack of thinking. Too often not good to people.

As a short-term, like days, solution it has helped, when the environment was a harmless one, but the mind was under too much concern.

 

[JarodRussell]

Rules of Engagement. From the ethical standpoint, one of the most disgusting movies ever made. Basically, the message is that a soldier is allowed to kill a bunch of civilians and that nobody should held him accountable for it, since, hey, he has it tough doing his job, OK? And that only other soldiers can understand him and will necessarily excuse him, while the lowly civilians have no right judging him for his war crimes.

The message was rather that he was innocent and someone destroyed the tape to prove it. But since you are innocent until proven guilty, he was released. The opening scene shows the audience what actually happened, and throughout the film the audience witnesses all the lies in the courtroom.

 

[DevilEyes]

Rules of Engagement. From the ethical standpoint, one of the most disgusting movies ever made. Basically, the message is that a soldier is allowed to kill a bunch of civilians and that nobody should held him accountable for it, since, hey, he has it tough doing his job, OK? And that only other soldiers can understand him and will necessarily excuse him, while the lowly civilians have no right judging him for his war crimes.

The message was rather that he was innocent and someone destroyed the tape to prove it. But since you are innocent until proven guilty, he was released. The opening scene shows the audience what actually happened, and throughout the film the audience witnesses all the lies in the courtroom.

Not in the movie I saw (granted, a long time ago). So who did kill those people then?

 

[JarodRussell]

Rules of Engagement. From the ethical standpoint, one of the most disgusting movies ever made. Basically, the message is that a soldier is allowed to kill a bunch of civilians and that nobody should held him accountable for it, since, hey, he has it tough doing his job, OK? And that only other soldiers can understand him and will necessarily excuse him, while the lowly civilians have no right judging him for his war crimes.

The message was rather that he was innocent and someone destroyed the tape to prove it. But since you are innocent until proven guilty, he was released. The opening scene shows the audience what actually happened, and throughout the film the audience witnesses all the lies in the courtroom.

Not in the movie I saw (granted, a long time ago). So who did kill those people then?

IF we are talking about the Samuel L. Jackson Rule of Engagement, the majority of the crowd was armed and shooting at them, and it was self defense. Unless you argue they should have surrendered or let themselves get killed. It is one of those films that depend on your pre-existing views. Like Insurrection or Avatar, which simply don't work if you already think that removing natives for exploiting natural resources is okay, for example.

 

[JoeZhang]

Rules of Engagement. From the ethical standpoint, one of the most disgusting movies ever made. Basically, the message is that a soldier is allowed to kill a bunch of civilians and that nobody should held him accountable for it, since, hey, he has it tough doing his job, OK? And that only other soldiers can understand him and will necessarily excuse him, while the lowly civilians have no right judging him for his war crimes.

Indeed, disgusting vile filth.

 

[the G-man]

"Offend" is too strong a word, but I tend to be irked by movies like "Sweet Home Alabama" that suggest that small-town, salt-of-the-earth, country folk are somehow purer and more decent than those snobby, over-educated city slickers . . . .

That's interesting. I have a bit of the opposite feeling. I get irked by the films/shows where every cop in a small town not played by Andy Griffith or Don Knotts is somehow racist or corrupt and the townspeople are inherently rubes.

I guess we all tend to be a little protective of our backgrounds.

Movies like Sweet Home Alabama tend to irk me simply because they are formulaic crap.

 

[Greg Cox]

"Offend" is too strong a word, but I tend to be irked by movies like "Sweet Home Alabama" that suggest that small-town, salt-of-the-earth, country folk are somehow purer and more decent than those snobby, over-educated city slickers . . . .

That's interesting. I have a bit of the opposite feeling. I get irked by the films/shows where every cop in a small town not played by Andy Griffith or Don Knotts is somehow racist or corrupt and the townspeople are inherently rubes.

I guess we all tend to be a little protective of our backgrounds.

I can see that.

 

[JoeZhang]

I can't stand those "your home town is the place you are suppose to be and you forgot how good it was" - my home town is a shithole, I''d rather sell crack than go back there.

 

[Greg Cox]

I can't stand those "your home town is the place you are suppose to be and you forgot how good it was" - my home town is a shithole, I''d rather sell crack than go back there.

Hell, I actually liked my hometown, but there's nothing wrong with pulling up your roots and moving somewhere else when the opportunity arises. I've been doing it every 10-15 years or so. Keeps life interesting.

And I think that, in general, it's good for young people to be reminded that the world is bigger than the town or neighborhood they grew up in. Getting out and seeing the world is generally a good thing.