HBO orders Joss Whedon ‘The Nevers’ to series
- Thread starter Enterprise is Great
- Start date
True Blood was close to porn, but most porn has better writing.
Now that last part is BS. That show (and a lot of things that show that kind of content on Netflix, HBO, etc) get away with stuff that would easily get them over an R-Rating. There is no way you could get away with that shit, outside of maybe a documentary and even then it wouldn't get a wide release. Plus apparently Sense8 does weird sex shit a lot. I've read a couple of reviews that mention the sex stuff actually goes beyond bad to outright tedious with its regularity. When it comes to the "disturbing" bar, mine isn't low, yours is just way too high.
As for what is disturbing, Sense8 definitely qualifies. Saying a birth is "beautifully shot" is like saying The Human Centipede has great cinematography. Even if it was true, it doesn't change things. Also, comparing Xenomorph spit to disgusting sex shit is hilarious. Just because a prop department might use weird stuff to get the effects they want doesn't mean anything.
But, who cares. I was just using the show as a comparison to the stuff HBO puts out. They're both gross, and far above R rated, but at least one has dragons and sword fights so at least part of it might be slightly entertaining. They're still both terrible in my opinion, one just happens to be the type of terrible I could tolerate better and neither are really relevant to this thread outside of when I was using them to talk about HBO's fucked up porn-ish content. I honestly don't care that JMS, a guy who hasn't been relevant for a decade, and a pair of film making siblings who have done exactly one thing I liked got together and made a gross, terrible show for Netflix. Just like I don't care that some people are obsessed with the rape filled pile of crap called Game of thrones.
I work in adult retail, and I approve this message.
I actually saw the show, you didn't. I know what it looked like, you're just making it up based on descriptions. So maybe you shouldn't argue from a position based on your own imagination of what it looked like against someone who knows what she's talking about.
Whatever. I do not care about Netflix's gross sex show. I know that it has a lot of freaky sex shit, and is just about the last thing I'd ever watch. Outside of being the kind of show that reveals that Netflix will just blow money on anything, and being an example of how fucked up Netflix will let its original programming get when it comes to weird sex stuff, its just some random crap show like so much of Netflix's original programming. I wouldn't even remember its name if Netflix didn't shove it onto the front page while i'm looking for other stuff, it would just be "That creepy sex show JMS and the Matrix people made". Outside of being especially disturbing sex wise, its nothing I care to pay attention to or argue about.
Talk to me again when you actually know what happens on a show instead of what your apparently interesting imagination tells you.
Last edited:
Well, one has to admit, Sense8 gave new meaning to the word 'clusterfuck'.
It was more of a pile, but with kissing.
I guess a bunch of reviewers, both professional and commenters on the internet, are all in some big conspiracy claiming the show is something different then what it is. How devious
I know enough about the weird sex shit. I know it exists, I know a few examples, and basically everything I've read, from people that liked it and people that didn't, says there is a lot of it. I really don't need to see it, just like I don't need to see, say, a nuclear bomb explode to know it both exists and is bad.
I said I wasn’t interested in your complete ignorance of the show, no matter how desperate you are to justify it.I guess a bunch of reviewers, both professional and commenters on the internet, are all in some big conspiracy claiming the show is something different then what it is. How devious
I don't seem to be the desperate one, you're the one who is claiming neutral party reviews are all lying, and I just find this all really bizarre.
For the record, @kirk55555 , would you concede that showing something that you don't want to see doesn't make a TV show objectively bad?
No review is neutral, that’s the entire point of a review.
I mean neutral as far as our argument is concerned. I've seen reviews from people with both opinions, and from professionals and just random internet people. I've read way too many reviews about this show.
That's not even the argument at this point. AP is arguing that the show doesn't have a lot of sex stuff, period, when I can find a very large number of people saying it does. I mean, I don't think there is an objectively good show or movie with a lot of sex shit, much less creepy sex shit, but that isn't even the issue at this point.
The word you're looking for is objective, not neutral.
No, she doesn't. She's arguing that the way the show depicts the sex stuff as a showing of love. And, I might add, it is not unreasonable for the overall story and characters. One of the themes of the show is sex, and it handles it in a very intelligent, empathic and mature way. If you object to that theme in general, the problem is with you, not the show.
Well, I didn't mean the review was objective. No review is objective. I just mean I've seen stuff confirmed by multiple reviews from people that both like and hate the show, and it was neutral information when it came to our argument.
AP's argument is literally that unless I personally saw something it didn't happen, no matter how many sources both positive and negative toward the show says they exist/happened. Its like saying that I can't state that, I don't know, Hawaii exists unless I personally see it.
You're describing objective information, not neutral.
Again, no. She described one of the moments about a lubed sextoy herself. Her argument is that, if you didn't see it, you can't judge the way it was depicted.