Hunting Scene
Looked pretty real and disturbing.
http://amanandamouse.blogspot.com/
It was disgusting.
==================
"Why do people always laugh in the wrong places?"
--Rod Steiger
I suppose you mean the killing of the animals. Obviously that was real. But as for the killing of Bluebeard's wife, that looked ridiculous and bizarre.
shareThey sure wouldn't allow that scene to be made the same way nowadays! That's what I love about 70's movies. They're generally extremely honest and aren't sugar coated and didn't give a damn about crap like censorship or activst droups of any kind!
I'm here, Mr. Man, I can not tell no lie and I'll be right here 'till the day I die
Honesty? Really? Really? And you choose Edward Dmytryk's "Bluebeard" to be your fine ideal, your shining example of honesty in film? You want to rail against censorship and THIS is where you decide to plant your flag??? I suppose if someone filmed a child rape for the sake of a "Francis the Talking Mule" picture you'd talk about the maverick approach to naturalism in movie making. "Cos Francis didn't give a *beep* yo!" Sheesh.
Ok, ok. I'm exaggerating. Maybe this doesn't carry the tragic commentary on warfare and modern violence of a "Francis Goes to West Point." I assumed more of a glorified Vincent Price/Peter Lorre picture from the late 60's/early 70's, but then maybe I missed the chapter on this movie in "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls." Yeah, this is what proves how trailblazing the 70's were.
FML, the inane things I expose my literate eyeballs to peruse. Toshguy (yeah, like that username doesn't scream "Richard Head") the world is a terrible place enough, now I've got to know YOU exist? Sheeeit. Now I have to attend a "droup" therapy just to sort this all out.
A tip: [*URL][/URL](remove the asterisk) for all your linking needs. spread the word Use this sig!
Sorry for making you so mad, Mr. Welles - radio broadcaster! I didn't express myself quite clearly enough in my previous post for someone as opinionated as you to catch my drift. I was being somewhat lighthearted and tongue-in-cheek when writing it. Nevertheless, I hope the time between then and now has made me mature enough to express myself on such an astute and erudite level as yourself.
What I meant is that movies in the 70's had less restrictions in regard to what and how the directors were allowed to show. I never inferred that Dmytryk's work on Bluebeard is ingenious or "trailblazing", but I laud the 70's era movies because a director could express himself any way he wanted in his work, without worrying about censorship (like in the studio system), nor about being politically correct or about toning his content down to catch the PG-13 rating because the producers want to distribute movies as such to ensure as many customers go see them (like nowadays).
Of course, the looseness of the restrictions would often lead to a display of bad taste - like in Bluebeard. I regard it as campy fun made by a great director who'd been forced to put up with the Hays Code for many years and just let it rip this time. He's made two of my all-time favorite movies - The Sniper and Warlock in which he persistantly pushed the envelope on what content a director could have in his movie and did it with grace. However, I can't deny that when there was no such envelope anymore, Dmytryk would usually churn out something overwrought like Shalako or or excessively smutty like Bluebeard.
In conclusion, Mr. Welles, I'm very sorry for forcing you to attend therapy and for making your life "sheeeitier" than it has to be. I hope you have recovered since you made your post and are in condition to reply to mine. Also, I take it as a compliment that you should compare me to the 17th century author Richard Head! The same to you! I'm sure if he were alive today, he would like to shake your hand on your excellent writing ability. My best regards to you, Sir!
I'm here, Mr. Man, I can not tell no lie and I'll be right here till the day I die
It's not just a matter of "nowadays" vs. "back then." Even Hollywood of that time would not have allowed the hunting scene to be made that way, since American movie productions had close monitoring of animal activity since the 1940s. This was made in Europe, where industry standards were different.
shareI suppose you don't eat Bacon, eh?
shareRegardless of whether a person eats meat or not, it's unfathomable that the slaughter of animals would be incorporated into any film made for our entertainment. I place this film on the level of CANNIBAL HOLOCAUST for it's loathsome depictions of animal cruelty. Sad that those animals had to die for such a poorly conceived, acted and directed pile of excrement.
shareThere is a tremendous difference between sustenance, and killing animals for pleasure.
shareYou see stuff in 70s movies that you're very unlikely to see in movies again. T'was the end of a number of eras.
shareYeah, this came from the era of Wake in Fright (kangaroo hunting), Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid (exploding chicken heads) and The Assassination of Trotsky (a real bullfight) - a real banner decade in animal cruelty. I'd be surprised if the hunting in Bluebeard weren't real.
"Away, laddy - or I'll burn you to a crispy noodle!"
Absolutely disgusting that the hunting was real. I was enjoying the look of the film and seemed good until that scene and promptly turned it off.
share