Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
HILARIOUS!"...in fact, it doesn't shock, it merely nauseates... i haven't seen it."
i'm SO excited! there's a talking fox too!
That's a bit off
the ability to critique a movie you've never seen.
the ability to claim libertarian tendencies and yet still support government censorship.
the ability to whip out the old "my god think of the children" argument
you've got some mad skills. perhaps you should take up politics instead of reviewing films seeing as how you obviously don't know what the fuck you are doing there.
- jinond, California, 19/7/2009 21:41
Click to rate Rating 181
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1200742/CHRISTOPHER-HART-What-DOES-film-banned-days.html##ixzz0LqCPWqPH
is that gainsbourg and defoe shaking hips or stand in genitals?
"You do not need to see Lars von Trier's Antichrist (which is released later this week*) to know how revolting it is**."
*Thanks for telling me when it opens. I'll be front of the line now.
**If you were saying this about the Mail I'd agree.
"I haven't seen it myself, nor shall I - and I speak as a broad-minded arts critic, strongly libertarian in tendency."
"But merely reading about Antichrist is stomach-turning, and enough to form a judgment*."
*Subtext: Like when we tell you about the darkies or the negro hordes.
"I haven't seen it myself, nor shall I - and I speak as a broad-minded arts critic, strongly libertarian in tendency. But merely reading about Antichrist is stomach-turning, and enough to form a judgment."
Then you're not a broad-minded arts critic, or even a critic, you're just a worthless piece of hack shit, you stupid, brainless, unequivocally redundant moron, YOU SELF-RIGHTEOUS WASTE OF OXYGEN, GRASS EATING, PLAY-DOUGH FACED SLUG-NUT MISERY-FUCK OF ABSOLUTE CRETINY!!
Got to give props to whoever's running the Mail website now - they've added a post rating system, so even if they elect not to approve your damning indictment of the latest Melanie Smith column, you can still mark down the comments of everyone that agrees with her.
It does sound pretty shit, though. Though to be fair, the 'critic' did a great job of talking about the film without once going into what it was actually about. But then I guess that's to be expected seeing as he didn't see it.
But it's one of those films that feels like it needs to be seen. If only for the controversy.
Or Charlotte Gainsbourg's tits.