<<In response to the post criticising others for "judging" those from the mighty United States, first of all "get over it!" I get a bit sick of reading Americans trotting out this "we are greater and more powerful than you" stuff, every time some Brit dares comment in a manner that might be deemed negative! So what? When your Justice, your Postal Service and your Public Health (not to mention your military) function with the efficiency of the British systems, you'll have really proved something! >>
sorry, in what invisible portion of my post did i claim the united states was mighty, or greater or more powerful than you? are you hallucinating?
<<And as for me, I come from the great big empty land Downunder! >>
good for you. i will refrain from judging your entire nation based on your ignorance.
<<Having got that off my chest....
When Brits (and others) "judge" how Americans might view a comedy, they base their assessment on what we know (the world of movie-watchers) about comedies that are made in America, presumably to entertain Americans. >>
no, they base their assessments on what their country chooses to import from among the many choices made in america. if your country thinks you're stupid and only imports stupid american films, that does not necessarily reflect on american films in general. i happen to AGREE that most american films are crap, but i think most films, from WHEREVER, are crap, and think it no more or less true of american ones. i have lived in other countries, on other continents, and do have some perspective on this.
<<This movie was remade, in a somewhat different style, to please American audiences. Why? Because the producers (American) JUDGED that the American people would like it better that way. >>
it was made to please american audiences; that doesn't mean it DID. our country underestimates our intellect just as yours, in choosing what to import, underestimates the intellect of most of your countrymen.
<(They also judged that American kiddies wouldn't understand what a "Philosopher's Stone" was and changed the name of the first Harry Potter book/film to "Sorceror's Stone". They also thought that, in an Australian movie, "The Castle", the US audience mightn't understand what was meant when a man said "Steve, could you move the Camira, I need to get the Torana out so I can get to the Commodore" so they replaced the names of Holdens with Fords. In other words, US producers don't credit US movie-watchers with a huge amount of intelligence. The Brits are not to blame for this, and neither is Bazza.) >>
so... obviously you agree with "them." again, you are judging a nation based on how someone else is judging them, which is based on nothing to start with. that's like hearing an adult talking down to a child and blaming the child. and again, not ALL american producers do this. you get to see the ones who do. lucky you! or maybe you just don't choose your films very well.
<<So pleased don't think that the British are displaying some negativity when they presume on the tastes of Americans. >>
sorry, i cannot comply with your request. anyone dumb enough to think that americans have bad taste based solely on what some greedy film producer thinks americans will like is displaying not only negativity but stupidity.
<<Basically, many people consider the remake of "Death at a Furneral" to be absolute cr*p, to use an Americanism. It is considered that, because it is crass in a way that British comedy is rarely crass. It is "obvious" in all the places where British comedy (including the original of this movie) is subtle.
In British comedies, they don't repeat a joke three times to make sure you got it. They don't spell out each verbal joke for the listener; they just them fly by, and if you miss one, then it's gone. >>
i don't see films like that so i wouldn't know. you're comparing minor stink to major stink. who cares?
<<On the other hand, the makers of an American comedy would hesitate to make fun of a midget, they would hesitate to show a man's naked backside in an entirely non-sexual context, and hesitate even further about showing an old man's bowel motion. These things are considered by a number of posters here as the height of crass. >>
again, who cares? are you judging hollywood or americans? you seem confused. most americans fail to faint at the sight of a man's butt. the fact that some (not all) producers think we might has nothing to do with reality. why are you basing your opinion of americans on such rubbish?
<<But this is a British movie and the Brits are rather more daring when it comes to revealing the obvious. However, the humour does not lie in the size of the manwithshortstature, the sight of the bottom, or the old man's poo. The humour is in the reactions of the characters to these things. >>
some brits are daring. then you have graham norton, whose idea of daring is to say poopoo and kaka. oh WELL. the daringness of brits has nothing to do, though, with the daringness of nonbrits, and you obviously haven't enough exposure to a wide spectrum of american film to make that comparison.
<<And because these people are British, and middle-class, their social mores are going to constrain their reactions. That is part of the humour. >>
if you say so. i wasn't actually interested in the film; i was interested in your bigoted statement. but this is a forum for the film, so carry on.
<<Watching the poor respectable Simon trying to cope with his own befuddled state of mind is (to some viewers) hilarious! Watching two young men who are already in a state of conflict coming to a realization that their father was having a homosexual relationship with a dwarf who is now blackmailing them, while at the same time, trying to remain PC about the manwithshortstature and the homosexuality is (to some minds at least) hilarious! Watching the manner in which poor Howard copes with a whole series of unreasonable and unpleasant demands that are laid on him, while still trying to be the loyal friend and supportive mourner, is (to some minds) hilarious. >>
i'm glad you enjoyed yourself.
<<Watching the subtle shifts in relationships, the developments of the characters as the events unfold, the changing of people's values and dawning of a number of "realities" are the delights of this movie. The poo, the btm, the short stature of the lover, and the hallucinogenic drug are catalysts to the humour. They are not the humour. >>
whatever you say. i didn't actually SEE more than a few minutes of the film and unlike SOME people, i'm not willing to judge it based on those few minutes. i'm also not willing to judge people based on where they were born, or hold them responsible for what some portion of someone's film industry thinks they're intelligent enough to appreciate. i am slightly more willing to judge people by how much of their judgments are based on crap like that. if you are willing to judge americans that way, you should probably be less surprised that your judgment is judged, and if you find this annoying, then you will just have to GET OVER IT.
g
reply
share