Ugly Things That Ruin a Show

Discussion in 'TV & Media' started by Spot's Meow, Sep 22, 2013.

  1. Foxhot

    Foxhot Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    Location:
    Foxhot
    They both get ugly and intense, though DEATH PROOF's is a lot less frequent....maybe more brutal in the infamously gruesome ten seconds during the car crash moments. Is it that extra gruesomeness which makes it bad in your view, or the pleasure Tarantino obviously gets out of it? Is RAMBO IV done right because it's not as gross.....or more conventional while still over-the-top meat-and-potatoes violence?
     
  2. Gaith

    Gaith Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    May 11, 2008
    Location:
    San Francisco, CA
    [​IMG]

    Well done; you earned that one. :rommie:
     
  3. Triskelion

    Triskelion Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2008
    Location:
    To the Bat Tank!

    Well foxhot, thanks for considering this idea and thanks for not pigeonholing it as the 80's superhero Rambo of First Blood II.

    First, let me say that Tarantino is awesome with or without my opinion. But in my opinion his approach, as illustrated in Death Proof, and Stallone's approach in Rambo IV both go off the charts in terms of raw, graphic violence. Personally I think Stallone depicted a greater scope of violence, from subtle personal characteristics/story to en masse wholesale meat grinding. Tarantino's violence is more of a thrilling time bomb you can hear ticking the entire time.

    I wouldn't call Rambo IV quite the same species as Rambo II. IV depicted violence through a lens of humaneness - and even Tarantino does that for brief moments, such as at the end of Pulp Fiction, with Sam Jackon's speech.

    I'm not sure how to define these differences. I'll try. Death Proof - Tarantino's "worst" as he put it, but still standing with the rest of his seminal filmography - reveled in objective violence. His characters are jaded and their motives selfish. The violence that stems from their experiences - seems meaningless.

    Stallone's violence was more subjective. He used violence like a brush to paint something beautiful out of the gore. His characters are not the lovers of violence that Tarantino's are. Stallone's characters battle with violence and so doing are somehow lifted from it. Tarantino's characters sink with it.

    This is all just how I took these films, I'm sure I missed some facets of these multilayered works.

    At the end of Death Proof, I was grossed out (not by visuals, but emotions). At the end of Rambo IV, I was at peace and a better person for having seen it. Stallone used violence as a spiritual catalyst. I think few understand the franchise like he does. Maybe I just personally prefer the warrior's view of violence rather than the flickjunkie's.


    To put it another way: just like a comedian can say almost anything as long as it's funny, a director can film almost anything as long as it's "internalizable."

    It's not the gore. It's the reason behind the gore that determines if it's entertainment for some. Otherwise it's like porn with all closeup shots - just the plumbing, no pique. May as well watch paint dry. Still, Tarantino is required viewing, period.



    By the way - I was extremely impressed with the visuals of Sin City as compared with Frank Miller's original comic. They freaking nailed it. Am I the only one who used to entertain himself redrawing pages from that comic?
     
  4. Foxhot

    Foxhot Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2011
    Location:
    Foxhot
    Have to be honest here. I've only seen RAMBO IV once. I've seen the hilarious DEATH PROOF ending multiple times. I'll take it over RAMBO IV....but if I could have only five Stallone films on a desert island, they'd be NIGHTHAWKS, CLIFFHANGER, LOCK UP,COPLAND, and, believe it or not, RAMBO III. Though I didn't care for RAMBO: FIRST BLOOD PART 2 at all I still respected RAMBO III for its ironically successful mission to top Part 2. In its own weird way, it worked.
     
  5. DonIago

    DonIago Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2001
    Location:
    Burlington, VT, USA
    Not Demolition Man?
     
  6. Timelord Victorious

    Timelord Victorious Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Location:
    Germany, Earth, the Solar System
  7. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    That reminds me. There was this show on Comedy Central TV Funhouse. It must have been by the guy who did TV Funhouse on SNL, and putting those cartoons in a TV show was probably a good idea. But between cartoons they had this thing where puppet animals behaved extremely grossly. They traveled through the toilet and came out with shit on them.

    Also that reality show cartoon on Comedy Central and every other show Comedy Central ever did since South Park was a success is pretty much unwatchably gross.
     
  8. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    I never said he called her ugly. The original poster said all his examples were from animated shows. Clearly that isn't the case because he also cited the ugly uniforms on the live action show two broke girls
     
  9. JirinPanthosa

    JirinPanthosa Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2012
    The actress playing her is attractive.

    Her facial expression on the show is ugly as hell.
     
  10. Spot's Meow

    Spot's Meow Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    California
    I was talking about my example of people, since that seemed to be the point of contention.
     
  11. Enterprise is Great

    Enterprise is Great Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2004
    Neelix's bare feet...Quark in a dress...Phlox cutting his toenails.
     
  12. Jono

    Jono Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2001
    Location:
    Australia
    The CGI on Sanctuary nearly ruined it for me, not necessarily ugly, but the CGI-ness of some of the stuff I found hard to overlook when I first started to watch it. I think I tuned it out over time.

    Just thought of an animated one, Ren and Stimpy. Found the art style when they did a close up of characters was gross and put me off the show.
     
  13. the G-man

    the G-man Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2010
    Location:
    to your immediate right
    Fair enough. Either way, my post was intended as a joke about what appeared to be you mischaracterizing that particular show, not a serious rebuke of you or your post. Apologies if that didn't come through
     
  14. Spot's Meow

    Spot's Meow Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    California
    Yes, I forgot about this one! In general I didn't like the animation on the show, it made it hard to watch.
     
  15. Aldo

    Aldo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere Out there beneath the pale moonlight.
    That was kind of the point of the cartoon, they were supposed to be ugly characters. I thought the writing on it was pretty strong though and it was quite funny. I can't look at it with childs eyes though as I was a teen when it was on. However I can look with childs eyes at...

    Like with 'Ahhhh, Real Monsters,' 'Ren and Stimpy' was meant to be a gross out show. I also happened to find it particularly funny. Now humor is subjective so if you didn't, that's up to you, but as a pre-teen I loved the hell out of the show. Now if you want to look at downright ugly, look no further then the 'Ren and Stimpy' revival show from a few years ago, which was just downright horrible, and didn't even try to be funny in favor of just being gross.
     
  16. Spot's Meow

    Spot's Meow Vice Admiral Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2004
    Location:
    California
    I did find it funny. I know that the point is that they ARE ugly, but that doesn't make it any easier for me to watch. If something is really visually unappealing then it lessens the likelihood that I am going to want to watch it, whether they meant it to be that way or not.
     
  17. Aldo

    Aldo Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2003
    Location:
    Somewhere Out there beneath the pale moonlight.
    Fair enough.

    There's a show on (or was on) Cartoon Network's Adult Swim that was just so repulsive I couldn't watch it, Squidbillies I think it was called, nothing redeeming about that thing.
     
  18. lurok

    lurok Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    Location:
    Lost in the EU expanse with a nice cup of tea
    That first season was very awkward. But glad I persisted as did get better.

    To put a British spin: we have a recently-finished school sitcom, appropriately titled Big School (for any Who/SF fans, stars Catherine Tate). It has some nice moments and characters, but it's a bit of a disaster and just looks really ugly, especially in HD.
     
  19. JarodRussell

    JarodRussell Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2009
    I get the impression that cartoon styles get uglier and uglier. You don't get anything near the quality of old Disney or Looney Tunes cartoons. Modern cartoons look just nasty.

    I think there was a Family Guy episode where they actually get into a Disney style universe. And all I could think of was how much better the drawings looked.
     
  20. Turd Ferguson

    Turd Ferguson Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 8, 2003
    Location:
    Kentucky
    You know, for the longest time, I refused to watch Squidbillies because of the art style, but one night I was bored and had Adult Swim playing in the background while I was on the computer and I heard some hilariousness going on in the background. It was Squidbillies. The art style for me is just as funny as the show itself. Especially how crappy the Sheriff is drawn.

    Seems like the creators of that show must have grown up around here because I swear it could take place where I live (well, if squids could be rednecks and walk on land and have meth labs).