I am curious. I want to have a intelligent conversation about this. As most of you probably know, I am not a huge fan of dropping the F-bomb. Just not my favorite word. I don’t use it in the comic, I don’t say it on the radio show, I bleep people who do, etc. It has always smacked of how badly people treat each other generally to me, as its used mostly in a derogatory way.
That’s not to say I judge anyone who enjoys having it in their regular vocabulary arsenal. More power to you…just keep it under control when my kids are around. 
Anyway, the question is this: Why is it that some movies are wall to wall F-bombs? Let’s take a classic like Goodfellas, or Pulp Fiction. Does spattering an array of F words to the tune of hundreds in a film add to the artistic merit, or even financial goal of a film?
I will give you an example. My first viewing of The Big Lobowski happened to be an edited version on cable…but here is the kicker: I had no idea it was edited. They did such a nice job that I literally missed all the cuts and breaks and sound changes that usually accompany badly “edited for TV” fair. I loved the movie, quickly called it one of my favorite Cohen bros. films and moved on.
When I told people I had seen it and loved it, they gaped at me like I was crazy, and said, “how did you get through it with all the F-bombs in it?” I had no idea. Now the question is this: Would the film been any better or worse with or without the heavy swears? I am not pretending to have the answer, but I would like to hear yours. You could apply the same argument to all of the biggest offenders. In other words, I guess what I am asking is, would a guy like Quintin Tarantino be considered the film genius he is without it? Or is that part of what makes the man in some eyes?
And lets face the raw truth…no one would care, be shocked, impressed, or whatever your reaction if the word did not incite just that: a reaction. It’s just that kind of word, pure and simple.
I know there is a whole other argument and conversation that can be made of violence in film, but we will save that for another day. For fun, I found this list of the movies that have used the F-bomb the most in film history. Interesting stats. WARNING: F-bombs are part of the link…durrr.
So, thoughts, feelings, stuff?
We’re worrying about words now? I HATE the word ‘package’ but no one seems to care. I dislike the German word for opposite (it sounds hurtful). And i respectfully disagree with those that say the “F-bomb” is a lazy writing moment in film and TV. For the record my favourite word is ‘ocean’. I challenge anyone to say it out loud and not hear the beach and sea embraced in some kind of romantic entanglement.
Seriously though? Vulgar language? Beyond the religious stuff which obviously is a no-go area for most, WORDS CAN’T HURT YOU unless they are said by a genius or a madman. My parents don’t like me a-cursing but can still get enjoyment out of the words…for the most part they are good little pithy words that fit really well into any sentance. I certainly prefer a rude-anism rather than an ‘um’ or an ‘err’ or a ‘like’ or {insert local generic sentance filler here}
no one is worrying about words…you guys do read the posts before you comment, right?
The question is not are swears never appropriate, the question is does ANY movie need 200 plus fraks or is that just plain ridiculous.
Maaah! Scott! Does any movie need 200+ faces? or 400+ legs? This is overly excessive! I demand they edit out most of the army from my copy of Lord of the rings. This IS about words, what they represent and what they mean to certain people. It’s always about words. (well not always)…
F-Bomb can bring some good to movie and in other cases its simply lazy writing. It depends on the skill of the writer to insert F*ck into a sentence with ease. Quentin Tarantino is good writer IMO for that.
If you go out of the theater and the only thing you have in mind is: “They said f*ck to many times!”. They have failed to create naturals dialogues while using the f*ck word. In other words, lazy writing.
Pulp Fiction is a good exemple for the use of the F-Bomb. It defines the characters. Gangsters arent the most educated people on earth so their way of speaking are limited. And it makes the dialogue more natural between them.
Bad Boys I and II are a bad exemple for the use of the F-Bomb because on the opposite of Pulp Fiction, policemen are usually more educated than gangsters. It doesnt mean they don’t use f*ck word, but not as much as others people even if they try to be “bad” cops.
…..”The Dude abides.”
Thought everyone on here would enjoy this audio from monty python (animation not from moty P) about the ‘F’ word:
ENJOY!!
http://www.nailmaster.ru/fuck.html
F**K YOU!!!
My opinion, and Scott may agree, is that the less one swears in a month the more likely I would be to think they have class. Also the more likely I would want to be around them.
Tone of voice can get as much feeling across as the f-bomb, and you don’t have to worry if a 2 year-old heard you.
Darth Yoda is apparently from the UK, yet fails to realise that the coarse American accent in that clip clearly does not belong to any member of Monty Python (not even Terry Gilliam, the one American member).
It is often also (wrongly) attributed to George Carlin.
As far as I can gather it is Jack Wagner, “the voice of Disneyland”!
^that link is worth every second of your time.
oops i meant Darth_yoda’s
@Yak Boy
Yep i am from the uk… duno why anyone would want to lie about being a Brit!!!
I was only going on what the end of the clip said… Audio: Monty Python
Been looking on ‘THE GOOGLE’ and every reference to that audio says that it was written by Monty Python. It was apparantly on their show, Monty Python’s flying circus.
Stick that in your pipe and smoke it old man!
I’m a mushroom cloud layin’ mother lover, mother lover.
Have you ever watched Pulp Fiction edited? They play it on Bravo all the time. It is horrendous. SO, yes, some movies NEED that many F-bombs to be taken seriously.
Yeah, the fact that it’s been attributed to them time and time again means it must be Monty Python.
It’s not like people could just be passing on bad info, could it?
Never mind that it doesn’t sound like ANY of the Monty Python team, and that I have not only seen, but actually own every single episode of Flying Circus, and this skit doesn’t appear on it, nor on any of their many albums. Nor is it even in the style of Monty Python (Python is full of surrealism, this skit is frankly too straightforward).
Never mind, also, that the internet is awash with material that is wrongly attributed – Monty Python, George Carlin, Steven Wright, Jeff Foxworthy and Weird Al Yankovic are all commonly credited with material they neither wrote nor performed.
This page has some more info on the actual origins of the skit:
http://serendipity.lascribe.net/tag/taboo_language
Here’s a little friendly advice: Google is not a good source for factual information. Just because a lot of people say something, doesn’t make it true.
I think it’s partially how you grow up, or the sort of people you associate with. I grew up in an average family, the computer breaks, dad uses words i wasn’t allowed to utter. I used to hate swearing and stuff, but then i got into heavy metal and all it’s relations, and it’s hard not to pick it up at that point
Here is my opinion: whether you like it or not, the f-word is part of the culture. This is how people speak. If you make a movie about street thugs, cold blooded killers, or generally tough guys you can expect them to use that word a lot.
Second – it is one of the few words in our language that carries this sort of weight. It’s poignant and powerful. Dropping an “f-bomb” at a dramatic moment often seems natural – it is just a perfect word to evoke anger, disbelief and many other feelings. Sometimes you can substitute it with “oh shit” or “damn it” or something like that. But fuck is the most emotionally charged word.
Personally I think that the idea that some words are inherently “bad” and should be avoided is silly. It’s all about social conventions. Some language is appropriate in one setting more than in the other.
For example – if you work in an office environment you refrain from using this word. Same thing when you have a dinner at a fancy restaurant, or you hang out with your kids. But if you go out for a beer with your buddies, then the word is more than appropriate.
Again, it’s just a word. There is nothing special about it. It’s just a silly social convention that says that this particular word is not appropriate in certain settings.
@Yak boy
Fair enough, the flying circus was a bit before my time, so i never got to see it!!
You obviously know more about python than me so I bow down to you oh knight of NI!
I have also been up all night working on a really lame university essay; i am rather tired so do forgive me for getting something wrong lol!!
Darthy
If you can get hold of it, check out Penn & Teller’s bullshit
or BS as it’s listed on the programming channel. They have an episode about taboo words. It’s really worth checking out.
Am I the only one who is amazed that The Aristocrats came in at the least usage of F%@k . In terms of context, that movie is one of the filthiest flicks ever made. And Pink Flamingoes didn’t even make the list.
Which is really worse Sam Jackson saying F%@k a hundred times or watching a drag queen simulate incestual sodomy and eat dog poo? Kind of takes the sting out of the word.
@Flame
I don’t create a barrier, when people cuss and swear, that creates barriers.
You say that I phrased what I said as if I was “holier than thou.” Without being prideful or boastful in anything I’ve done I’m going to say that I am holy. Not because of anything I’ve done but because of what Christ did on the cross for me. Because of His blood being shed I’ve been justified and sanctified. I’m one of those Christians that *try* and act like a Christian.
I’m sorry if I came across snobby or anything like that, that wasn’t my point. I just personally hate swearing. If you want to continue this discussion, feel free to contact me at my webpage (on my name).
I don’t really care about how many times someone says “fuck” in the course of a movie. I think that there is probably more shock value associated with in the staes as opposed to Canada (where I live). There are a lot of things on TV here that don’t fly down there. I really don’t get it, Americans get worked up over swearing and sex, but expose their kids to violence all over the place.
@ Cyborg commando
Thats if indeed god exists or jesus ever existed.
I don’t hate swearing, but I hate how it’s used every other word by classmates of mine, I really stick out like that, I said the S word today and the surrounding people were like
“O_o Woooaaaah!”
Anyway, I LIKE alternaties!
I say “friggen” and… well I say friggen.
I used to swear alot a little while back, when I was with my friend trying to avoid a retard (ehehehe… ^_^”) I said “S*** s*** s*** s***!” nervously till I caught myself doing it ._.
*ahem* I don’t really watch swear movies anyway.
Coconut’s a dude
lol w/Tennesse Taylor
Maybe I’ve just become desensitized from the military, but I didn’t even notice the swearing in “Jarhead” or “The Boondock Saints” (my favorite movie), except for Rocco’s awesome line. It just seemed so natural for the characters.
Andrew, I’d pay for a Barbie movie where she said “fuck”.
And with that said, I agree that it’s only a word, and depends on context, and frequency. For example, fuckfuckfuckfuckfuckfuck. Meaningless, right? I don’t swear casually, so when someone hears me say it, they know I’m angry, or hit my thumb with a hammer.
What really riles me up is the overuse of “like” as a conjunction. For some reason I tried watching -one- episode of Laguna Beach, and I just wanted to duct-tape all of the kiddies’ mouths shut! It was, like, like they had, like, no concept of, like, what, like, normal speech patterns, like, sound like. Like.
“I don’t create a barrier, when people cuss and swear, that creates barriers.”
..and sometimes when others are the ones who swear and one doesn’t, it creates a barrier between them. I don’t swear that much, others around me do. I have no problem with them swearing, but they find it a little jarring that I don’t.
Surely your statement should have been more like “when others swear around me, I feel it creates a barrier between myself and them”? Although perhaps a little more eloquent (apologies, I’m somewhat sleepy at the moment, hehe).
“You say that I phrased what I said as if I was “holier than thou.” Without being prideful or boastful in anything I’ve done I’m going to say that I am holy. Not because of anything I’ve done but because of what Christ did on the cross for me. Because of His blood being shed I’ve been justified and sanctified. I’m one of those Christians that *try* and act like a Christian.”
Why is your religion related?
“Holier than thou” was used in inverted commas in order to express the way your comment seemed rather arrogant, as if by not swearing it puts you on some sort of moral high ground. Of course, in order for a “moral highground” to actually work there’d have to be objective morality, which there isn’t, although you may argue otherwise, by the sounds of your immediate willingness to bring religion into the matter.
If you’re one of those Christians who try and act like a Christian, I’m rather glad that I am not a Christian. However, reading your comments with me was my friend and fellow podcaster, Chris, who is a Christian, attends church regularly and is involved in our university’s Christian Union. He seemed to agree that bringing your religion into it seems somewhat silly. Christ died for y/our sins? How nice. How is that relevant?
I like Chris and have no problem with him being religious, because he does it in a way I can respect. He does what he thinks is right and keeps it out of normal day to day life. That isn’t to say he doesn’t necessarily live by the principals of Christianity in his everyday life, but if he does, he doesn’t stop to justify to the world at large why he does things. That should be between your God and you, a private matter, shouldn’t it?
——
“*ahem* I don’t really watch swear movies anyway.”
Swear movies?
Eh?
Sorry, Scott, I missed it. No not necessary, sometimes it fits, but it can pretty much always be done another way.
Scott, I’ve always respected your opinion about the use of language on your podcast because it’s your show and your atmosphere and your reputation. You should get to choose what you want on your own f-in show, ya know?
That said, I think concerns about “bad” language fall into the same category as video game violence. If an adult can be expected to play a violent video game and still love and care for their family and fellow humans, they’re certainly capable of dropping the f-bomb like crazy and being good human beings.
Language has a lot of power, and restricting the use of “bad” language is a very subtle attempt to control another person’s place in society. We care way too much about how people say things, instead of how people act.
That said, the previous two paragraphs don’t apply to your show. It’s your place, your rules, your decision, and I respect that you want an environment with no cursing. I don’t have a problem with the f-bomb, it wouldn’t bother me in the least if everyone used it on your show, or any show, but if you don’t like it, then keep on doing what you’re doing.
I 100% agree with Scott on this. To me, the gratuitous use of the F-bomb in media is nothing more than poor script writing. This was my problem with “Inside Man”. I loved the movie but the sheer number of F-words comes across as extremely lame… among other things.
I even get tired of hearing people say in on Xbox Live during a match. To a lot of people the F-word is an adjective, noun and verb. Along with some prepositions they string together 4+ F-words into a sentence, geez. C’mon guys, grow up, show some maturity, and for goodness sakes learn the English language.
well, although its not about movies… it does deal with swearing.
im a huge Linkin Park fan, and i always thought it was pretty sweet they didnt feel the need to swear in either of thier 1st two albums. i say “feel the need” because they didnt interntional leave them out but just never felt the urge to. ive heard them live and they to have an occasional swear word.
i think more music and movies really should try to leave swearing out unless its very appropriate. if i got shot or hit in the nuts, im propably gonna swear, but a 10 min cuss fest over a stuck jar lid isnt neccisary.
the use of the f-word is linked to a sexual act and that lead me to something i cant seem to understand.
games, movies with much violence get a lover rating than games/movies with some naked peole (“sexual content”) can someone explain that to me.
I would rater have my kids see some nippels, etc that violence!
Is that and old legacy from when we kicked you out of europe?
@Darth
They both do. Msg me for more info
@Flame
How is what I believe related? What I believe is infused to the very depths of my being, of all of us. What I believe is the underlying reason for why I make the choices I make. It is extremely relevant.
As for an objective, absolute morality there is one. Some of it is very easy to see while some of it is difficult. In any event, there is an absolute morality.
***********This is why I wanted to be messaged. Go the debates section of the forum to continue this please, I’m porting Scott’s original question over.***********
Personally I’ve never noticed whether or not a movie/videogame/music has had swearing in it. While in some places it is most certainly gratuitous, in others, it actually sets the mood for what they’re trying to convey. Movies…. in some cases are meant to script real life, so in real life would you have a bunch of gangsters speaking politely with proper pronunciation and no swearing or would they be talking in slang with swearing. If you’re trying to imitate life, then I understand, if the purpose is to try to be “edgy” then there is no point. If you’d even like to take another deeper look, you could examine that the word itself is not bad, it’s the way society has put emphasis on that word to be bad. Had things gone different a word like “box” could have been as bad as the F-word, depending on its use and perceived meaning….in the end it’s the emphasis we place on the words, not the words themselves.
A screenwriter and filmmaker myself, I would like to speak to this directly.
Understand that anything I go on about is only in the context of my own writing and my perception of the methods used by the screenwriters of the 2 films Scott directly referenced in his post.
This issue is not about the ‘f-bomb’. This issue is wholly about the use of language as a whole. A thoughtful screenwriter will not use a word because of its meaning outside of the context of the film – a glam word or a curse word – but will place his words to most effectively convey the point being made and to move the story along.
The two examples given, Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction, are a perfect contrast to affect an exploration of this point. They juxtapose one another in that one uses the ‘f-bomb’ inclusively while the other uses it exclusively.
Goodfellas is meant to be a realistic representation of the New York Mafia from the mid 60s to the early 80s. While I have only visited New York on occasion, and have never been a member of La Cosa Nostra, I can attest to hearing the ‘f-bomb’ in multiplicity while engaged merely in tourist activity. I live in Chicago, a city I would like to think is at least comparable to New York in both urban activity and (historic) mafia presence. I hear the ‘f-bomb’ in multitude, in myriad situations, daily. I am a computer programmer…
GoodFellas represents a group of people in a class and position in which the use of explicit terminology was rife. The ‘f-bomb’ may as well have been ‘potato’ for all they cared. It is inclusive in that it is a part of their daily vernacular and to have not represented this would be inaccurate. In this case, the word (and many more like it) was in integral part of the characters it was spoken by.
Pulp Fiction, on the other hand, creates its own reality, and as such it takes ownership of the use of the ‘f-bomb’. It is, because of this, an exclusive use. It is used specifically because of its illicit meaning outside of the context of the film. Though it may be written as a natural emittance for the characters who say it, those characters are not bound to any historical or externally comparable structure and are written to say it to evoke response.
That is not to say that there is anything wrong with this type of exclusivity. To expect anything less from a film titles ‘Pulp Fiction’ would be ridiculous. It is an over-exposed gritty and over-the-top exploratory fiction – as all pulp fiction is/was.
In both contexts the use of the word is valid and justified, it is the impetus of the use, I think, that one needs to evaluate.
As a screenwriter, I feel that my characters may naturally use certain language to affect a point. In a recent film, ‘Switch’ [ http://www.areyouaswitch.com ], the main character makes frequent use of the ‘f-bomb’, and I have him do so specifically to invalidate his character. No one else in the film uses language as harsh as his. This contrast is implicit and specific and done with the intention of driving the viewer away from this character’s opinion. This is done in many more ways than simply the language, but the language is used with great effect. Great effect enough, in fact, to have caused a very interesting situation early on:
The actor playing Parker, the main character, is a practicing Christian. He auditioned for the part and we offered it to him immediately. He is an amazing actor and we were lucky to have him. We sent him home with a script and scheduled rehearsals.
A few weeks later we gathered for the first rehearsal and he showed up early. He pulled me to the side and asked if we could discuss the language used in the film. He brought out his script and he had marked and counted *every* use of the ‘f-bomb’, as well as all other ‘curse’ or ‘swear’ words.
He was concerned, of course, that his character used these words too much. It wasn’t directly in line with his moral standard, and wondered if we could clean up the character.
My response was simple: No.
And this is where I see the problem. This gentleman, an amazing actor in his own right, was not able to see the forest, as they say, for the trees. His character’s progression was lost on him for his focus on the words themselves. He was more concerned with the reading and saying of single words than with the character development described by those words (and much more). I explained to him that his character needed to be disliked, needed to be too course and too base for his situation – I explained that this was the very root of his character – and he acquiesced.
A week later he returned with his character built not around words, but around ideas – and the ‘f-bomb’ itself slid right into place where it should have been, just another word in line with this character and not the focus of his dialog.
That is not to say that explicit words, actions, sounds, whatever, aren’t used for ‘added’ value – they are, far too often, but so are terrible CGI, horrible ‘hot’ actresses and badly made sequels- but that is all crap art.
Giving any word the power to be plucked from dialog crafted to tell a story is not an issue the writer must deal with, but the viewer/reader/listener/whatever.
A closing example. In true film geek form I will cite Blade Runner:
In Ridley Scott’s Blade Runner, the Nexus 6 combat replicant Roy Batty confronts his brain’s creator, Eldon Tyrell. When asked why he has come to ‘meet his maker’, Roy, who has said very little to this point, and has been frighteningly calm and reserved, says:
“I want more life, FUCKER.”
Taken out of context, that line seems childish. If I had seen it in a screenplay, without having read the rest, I may have stricken it. it is base and simplistic. In the direct context of this story, however, there could be NO better line. It is one of the 2 most referenced lines in this classic film because of the meaning and strength it conveys. One must put away his own preconception and take the line in the context of the film – and ONLY in the context of the film. At that point, the word “Fucker” becomes high fucking art. (did you see that there, what I just did?)
Look, the New York mafia is going to drop the bomb. Villains are going to drop the bomb. Teenagers in horror films, snarky crime detectives, strippers in clubs, etc. are going to drop the bomb. It’s not because screenwriters (good ones, as I hope to one day be) are trying to push the ‘fuck’ button in you – I know this from experience – they are saying it because they SAY it. As mentioned, I am a computer programmer. White collar, upper-middle class, reserved and professional… I hear the ‘f-bomb’ ALL DAY. In meetings, in the elevator, on the street, in cabs, at the theater… it is said. People say it. Gandalf doesn’t drop the ‘f-bomb’ because it is contextually inaccurate for him to do so. Scarface, however, MUST.
One last example – if you’ve read this much, I appreciate it, thanks! The show ‘Battlestar Gallactica’. This one kills me. They use the term ‘frack’ to represent ‘fuck’. ‘I’m fucking hit!’ becomes ‘I’m fracking hit!’.
This is an example of exactly how much strength people have incorrectly given to a WORD rather than a MEANING. The reason ‘fuck’ is reprehensible is because of its meaning. It is NEVER said in a good situation – it is an expression of anger or frustration or hatred or disgust. The MEANING is offensive, the combination of f-u-c-k is just that, a conflagration of letters, not unlike p-o-t-a-t-o (which is said a LOT in Middle Earth). The Battlestar crew MEAN ‘fuck’, but the letters have to be changed because people are picking out the ‘fuck’s and not the meaning behind them. They are reading the script and counting words, just as my actor had in Switch, and not paying anything like attention to what is actually being said.
The Battlestar crew is saying ‘fuck’. They MEAN ‘fuck’. They just have to change a few letters so people who count words rather than meaning can glaze over that and ignore the matter at hand: they MEAN ‘FUCK’.
Thanks for your time!
Most people see “maturity” and the cursing in general as going hand in hand. Imagine a serious and gruff guy, heck let’s take the main character from Gears of war and instead of using $H@&, he’d say “dangit!”, would he seem as serious? I dunno, but I guess you CAN do a successful movie and keep the bad words down. Plus those examples you cite are just too grtuitous, but some people LIKE or even LOVE to use those words daily.
I hate the f-bomb and its associates, I really don’t use them unless I’m steaming mad, and even then I mostly keep it to myself. But sometimes I guess there are cases when the cuss words are just never going away.
I’m the kind who believes that if you’re smart, you can do better than reducing yourself to spewing expletites. I’m also the kind who really has a problem with people cussing strongly around my sisters or any kids in general, and even around ladies (that’s just rude).
I am late to this discussion but if you look at the top grossing films of all time, you have to go deep in the list before you reach an “F-Bomb” movie. That should give a hint as to it’s importance to the marketablity of a film.
@AHIFilm:
I agree with everything you said except for this line:
“It is NEVER said in a good situation – it is an expression of anger or frustration or hatred or disgust.”
As was pointed out in Darth Yoda’s link, fuck is a highly versatile word. So, in context, New York mafia, villains, teenagers in horror films, snarky crime detectives, strippers in clubs, etc. are going to drop the bomb, not just in anger, frustration, hatred or disgust. It will also be used as a descriptor of sorts, as an adjective or adverb, in addition to its more popular form.
It would not be out of character for a member of La Cosa Nostra to utter “That’s a fuckin’ hot chick!” when a pretty girl walks by. So, from the mafia person’s point of view, he’s in a “good situation” – he got to see a pretty girl.
Certainly an interesting issue. I’m going to home in on Pulp Fiction, seeing as you mentioned it Scott
I don’t think the the F-Bomb detracts from the movie, nor Tarantino’s genius. I was saw his talent in the way he interlinks the stories and so on. There are scenes in the film, particularly the Samuel L Jackson scenes, where the F-bomb just makes the film more enjoyable. I howled laughing at the ‘Say what again!’ scene. It’s just comical. That could be a trait reserved for Mr Jackson though – The first scene he’s in in the film Basic (also with John Travolta) is hilarious because of the language he employs.
I’m going to agree with Traitorfish in that if the character in the film would swear a lot, or drop the F-bomb or whatever, then it’s acceptable as it makes the film more believeable. I mean would Pulp Fiction be as good if SLJ’s speech went like:
“Say what again! Say what again! I dare ya, I double dare ya you sponge, say what one more flipping time!”
Just not as entertaining is it?
I love Pulp fiction fair play
“Giving a chick a foot massage and sticking your tongue in the holiest of holies aint the same mother f-bombing thing”
Lmao, brilliant
@David
Your hint to MARKETABILITY is correct, but does not speak to the VIABILITY of the art form.
Spider Man 2 isn’t on that list only due to artistic merit. Though a great film, it is also a film families can see together. Kids = tickets.
@bleh
Absolutely stunning point.
@AHIFilm
I see your point. ‘Apples to oranges’ I guess. I would however question the validity of most ‘F-Bomb’ movies as to them being ‘artforms’.
@David
I agree with you. I think there are a great number of films (a striking majority) that use explicit images/language IN PLACE of art.
Goodfellas and Pulp Fiction, having both been mentioned by Scott in the post proper, were the focus of my embarrassingly long-winded excise.
can you be more white scott?
I can agree that the f-bomb has been dropped more often than it used to be when i was younger. I am not innocent as I had dropped it many times in my past but as I had a kid I had to drastically change my language. I know it still associates with the meaning behind it but I have gotten myself to throw out optional words (a lot of the times slowly extended trying not to say the original word) like Fruit. I know it sounds pansy, but I have a two year old who repeats everything I say
Art reflects life, and using “fuck” accurately reflects the realistic speech patterns of the lower class “every man” characters often portrayed in such films as you’ve mentioned.
@Cyborg Commando – I have no intention of joining a forum just to argue this.
I have no idea how you can live in a world where you believe there is only one set of defining morals, at least not whilst claiming to be rational or sane.
How can there be one single moral code for all? You could argue all Christians have a single moral code, but that doesn’t mean it must apply to all people. Maybe you believe it *should*, but that doesn’t mean it *does*.
It’s like saying that there’s one type of music that is the best, regardless of personal opinion.
What I believe to be morally acceptable might be against your morals. Does that make mine right? Or yours for that matter?
I struggle to take anyone seriously who claims there’s one true moral code. It’s such a close-minded view of the human psyche, the world, life and human beings simply aren’t that clear-cut.
Going by the contents of the Bible, Christianity doesn’t have any kind of high ground when it comes to morality – the Old Testament is filled with accounts of brutal massacres of women and children directed against any group who didn’t worship the same God (or any group who worshipped the same God in a different way, or did something not approved of by the group doing the massacring) So religious tolerance is out.
Racism is apparently also OK – the 3 sons of Noah each founded a different nation (aka race) one of which was designated by God as servants to the other 2. If you’re interested, the 3 races were Jews, Caucasians and “other” – Africans, Asians, Aborigines, American Indians, Inuits etc. etc. Guess which ones were the servant race.
Even the 10 Commandments aren’t stunning examples of morality – the first 5 are all to do with being a good little worshipper rather than true morality, and those that are important to non-religious morality are not (and were not at the time) anything revolutionary – they’re very basic rules that have featured in every moral code in all of history.
The New Testament.. well it leaves out the brutal massacres, and Jesus had some good moral ideas (again, nothing new or special – even “The Golden Rule” was already an old piece of philosophy) but he was strangely silent on certain areas like slavery. If the moral code set out was intended to be absolute then does this mean that slavery is as acceptable now as it was then, or is it meant to be taken in context, in which case it is not absolute.
The various letters written by Paul to all the groups of Christians aren’t a stunning example of good moral thinking either, he goes one better than not mentioning slavery and tells slaves that they should be contented with their lot in life and not go against their master (same thing goes for wives being subservient to their husband btw)
Read the Bible, really read it, look at what is actually said, then come back and try and argue that it can be used as a source of absolute morality
–
As for swearing, I have no problem with it – words are a tool for conveying meaning and occasionally that meaning is anger, in which case fuck feels like a good, earthy word to use (something about it just makes it feel right for that kind of use, I think its the hard ending – you get that in a lot of swearwords)
Other times the meaning wants to be emphasised, another time it can be useful. There are other words that can do this, its all about picking the right one. If it fits, it seems natural. In the same way, in films, its not about the number of times a word is used but if its used out of place – saying “oh dearie me” when a solid “oh fuck!” would make more sense seems just as wrong to me as saying fuck when another word would fill the space better.
I’ll keep this short as most of you probably didn’t read through all of that.
The F-bomb in a movie gives it a sort of underground appeal. Makes it less clean and therefor more “realistic” to the situation.
i.e., in pulp fiction, there were killers, in The Big Lobowski, it was a group of lower class grungy guys with a semi psychopathic guy that wanted to be a thug so they used the word to give that feeling to the plot.
This is what a director will tell you. The other reason for the using the f-bomb is the shear shock value. The number of times in The Big Lobowski was well beyond what was needed simply for the joke at the end where the narrator asks “The Dude” if he needs to use all that language.
@PurrNaK
“I’ll keep this short as most of you probably didn’t read through all of that.”
Pretty excellent how you completely invalidated anyone else’s statement before making your own point – a point already spoken to at length.
The above is sarcasm. I used it for shock value. As a director, however, I’ll just say it was to be gritty and more “realistic” to the situation.
@ Anon: “Everyone is entitled to their voice, how would you feel if any religious phrases were censored? If every “amen” was bleeped out?”
I’d be pretty happy about that. Religion is the direct motivation for about half of the evil that humans do to one another (the other half being motivated by greed for power or wealth).
Feel free to practice your religion in private; but if you attempt to rub my face in it in a public place, be aware that *I* feel free to tell you what an utter prat I think you are for supporting the suppression of intelligent thought and denying the basic equality of all mankind.
I think Tarantino is/was a genious and not because of the swearing. Look at Kill Bill for example, or Reservoir Dogs, these are super tight scripts and he has a pulse for what is cool retro.
I think we have to accept you are from Utah and it’s no surprise that that company that takes movies and cleans them up is based in Utah and is religious. On Goodfella’s, the book (by Nicholas Pileggi, as was Casino) is just a great story and the movie was too, and I don’t recall the book having gratuatious swearing. take the character played by Joe Pesci. His swearing is just a part of who he is and I don’t find it offensive, as, let’s face it, this is life and we don’t need to pretend there is some Utopian existence out there, as those who seek to edit movies believe.
Heh… this has had over 100 posts. Scott certainly knows how to choose a popular topic…