Sin City: A Dame To Kill For

[batfan08]

Even then, though, why wouldn't you want your kids seeing an exposed breast? The point is that we've sexualized what is, essentially, fatty tissue to the point of offensiveness. Why can I walk around a beach with no top, but a woman can't, even though, logistically, we've got the same exact thing, but with different fat levels? I'm not saying I'm one of the people who's not fallen victim to the over-sexualization, I absolutely am (I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like breasts as much as I do, if I hadn't), I just think that it's telling of a society when a woman can't breast feed, for example, without potentially offending someone who's designated a part of her body with a different meaning than it should have.

With that in mind, I think I've strayed from argument for the poster, and more towards our societal views on sexuality, in general. I will say that, regarding the poster, it goes both ways, though. I stand by my argument that we overinflate the importance of, and oversexualize, breasts, but, so does that poster. They say "*** sells," and I'll be damned if Rodriguez was thinking "Eva Green would look like a total badass in a sheer bathrobe with nothing underneath." So, in that respect, I do see where you're coming from.

 

[Sachiel]

They say "*** sells," and I'll be damned if Rodriguez was thinking "Eva Green would look like a total badass in a sheer bathrobe with nothing underneath." So, in that respect, I do see where you're coming from.

 

[crows]

You said you didn't know why they could see a gun and not a ****. For the same reason they can in my house. That's not a stupid standard. There's nothing inappropriately adult about weapons. For my kids, I personally have less problem with violence than sexuality on TV or movies. Not too many teenagers are going to derail their lives with indiscriminate gunfighting or car chases.
Nonsense. There's all kinds of nudity and sexuality in movies that never get any response from the 'ultra-religious right'. One need not be a prude or a puritan to not want their elementary-aged kids gawking at Eva Green's ****s in a movie theater lobby while waiting to see the Lego Movie or whatever.
The poster is fine. Eva Green is worth a look. But, it ought not be hanging in theater hallways for all to see. It'll get more attention for being 'banned' anyway.

Nobody said 'damaged for life'. But, I wouldn't take my kids to see Sin City ... and that all the women are literal prostitutes, and dressed that way, is one of the top reasons. If I'd not let them see the movie ... I'd also rather they didn't see the same objectionable stuff on the poster when waiting for a different movie.

As for your 'nursing' example -- certainly you see the difference in nursing a baby and taking one to a strip joint.

SnakeDoc

it is not just the gun itself.... is the fact that a guy will shoot 50 people in the movie and you don't have a problem with that

Uma Thurman can chop up and dismember 88 guys in Kill bill with a sword on Basic Cable, but showing a ****? NO WAY They will Shut Down the channel

Good point. I see where you're coming from Snake. From that standpoint I guess I will stand corrected a bit. I would agree I don't want my kids seeing a naked breast over certain levels of violence. However that poster doesn't seem inappropriate at all to me. That's what's confusing to me is how that is inappropriate. Whatever. You're right though that this is only good publicity for the movie.

guys, the movie is rated R. there is no way a kid will just stumble upon this movie...

Most movies with nudity are rated R. besides, nudity does Not equal ***. What if a woman is taking a shower? or swimming alone nude? those are all equally bad for mainstream audiences. That's the point, why is it okay to show violence on tv and movies like 300 or Kill Bill on basic cable, but a nude **** will bring protests and an angry mob?

 

[crows]

Even then, though, why wouldn't you want your kids seeing an exposed breast? The point is that we've sexualized what is, essentially, fatty tissue to the point of offensiveness. Why can I walk around a beach with no top, but a woman can't, even though, logistically, we've got the same exact thing, but with different fat levels? I'm not saying I'm one of the people who's not fallen victim to the over-sexualization, I absolutely am (I'm pretty sure I wouldn't like breasts as much as I do, if I hadn't), I just think that it's telling of a society when a woman can't breast feed, for example, without potentially offending someone who's designated a part of her body with a different meaning than it should have.

With that in mind, I think I've strayed from argument for the poster, and more towards our societal views on sexuality, in general. I will say that, regarding the poster, it goes both ways, though. I stand by my argument that we overinflate the importance of, and oversexualize, breasts, but, so does that poster. They say "*** sells," and I'll be damned if Rodriguez was thinking "Eva Green would look like a total badass in a sheer bathrobe with nothing underneath." So, in that respect, I do see where you're coming from.

In New York is legal for a woman to be topples on the street. Not a lot do it, but some of them go out sometimes without a top on. Women that are trying to fight that dumb idea that their ****s must be covered at all times.
Like you said, their chest is not that different from us, How come a guy with fat ****s doesn't have to cover up with a bra?

but yeah, you can google it, "topples new york protest". There are other protests around the country.

This is such a bizarre culture where "Naked ****" Equals "***" or "Strip Joint"............ I woman cannot be naked on a movie because that will automatically means *** will be happening?

 

[SnakeDoctor]

it is not just the gun itself.... is the fact that a guy will shoot 50 people in the movie and you don't have a problem with that

Uma Thurman can chop up and dismember 88 guys in Kill bill with a sword on Basic Cable, but showing a ****? NO WAY They will Shut Down the channel



guys, the movie is rated R. there is no way a kid will just stumble upon this movie...

Most movies with nudity are rated R. besides, nudity does Not equal ***. What if a woman is taking a shower? or swimming alone nude? those are all equally bad for mainstream audiences. That's the point, why is it okay to show violence on tv and movies like 300 or Kill Bill on basic cable, but a nude **** will bring protests and an angry mob?

The point was that kids could stumble upon the poster. Which is why it was banned from use in theaters. Justifiably.

I don't mind my kids watching people get shot in an action flick. Like I said, not too many kids derail their lives with indiscriminate gunfighting. We don't let 'em watch really gory stuff, but, run-of-the-mill violence doesn't bother me at all. I've let 'em watch episodes of 24 without a second thought ... and turned off episodes of The Big Bang Theory for being overly sexual. Sexual propriety is a tough lesson to teach these days.

Even with allegedly non-sexual nudity -- to the extent such a thing exists (the hoards of websites that collect screencaptures of naked celebrities in shower scenes seems to indicate it doesn't all that much) -- I'd rather not teach my elementary-aged daughter that its appropriate for your naked parts to be displayed onscreen for all to see.

This is such a bizarre culture where "Naked ****" Equals "***" or "Strip Joint"............ I woman cannot be naked on a movie because that will automatically means *** will be happening?

Gotta tell ya ... I don't see all that much difference between that poster, and what you'd get at a strip joint. Girl's prettier. Lighting's better. But, its an intentionally sexualized poster. She ain't breastfeeding.

SnakeDoc

 

[crows]

sexual stuff I understand. I won't ague with that.

movies will Never show a woman's 'jayjay ever. You just made me realize, I am not even referring to their lower regions

seems bizarre that ****s cause so much commotion. but Even a guy's butt is okay. I've seen guys butts on comedy shows or basic cable tv. it is done for comedic purposes but still, ****s are a thing to hide, but guy butts are okay? I don't really get that.
(A woman's butt is not okay to show either. but a guy's butt is... you don't find that strange? )

Also, you know what else is really weird, the nipple is the root of all evil. If a girl has pasties on, she can be shown on tv. I Remember the E channel showing the Howard Stern show at 7 PM and they had a girl with pasties on. no blurring was necessary. this was basic cable too, I am not sure what is so evil about a nipple they act like it is the boogeyman.

 

[Sachiel]

Because they're ***illating.

 

[Uncanny Web-Slinger]

New (altered) poster

Original:

 

[TheObsoleteMan]

Good thing they altered it, it's not like any kid could just type her name into google and see a plethora of topless pics of her.

 

[crows]

Good thing they altered it, it's not like any kid could just type her name into google and see a plethora of topless pics of her.

or watch 300 clips online

 

[Matt S]

****s will be the downfall of society! Or so says the uber conservatives among us! Look at all the attention Scout willis has received over her tatas

 

[SnakeDoctor]

****s will be the downfall of society! Or so says the uber conservatives among us! Look at all the attention Scout willis has received over her tatas

Most of us uber-conservatives rather like ****s.

SnakeDoc

 

[occulum]

 

[crows]

i am definitely going to hell then, no amount of praying and good deeds can save me now.

 

[crows]

not entirely sure of some of the stuff they are showing here. Jessica Alba looks kind of stupid, some of the dialogue is kind of dumb too

 

[GasparZizou]

Yup not quite feeling the trailer


Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk

 

[RJMacReady16]

I'm slightly conservative (would disavow all knowledge of the American Republican party) and love ****s.

Sin City is a train wreck. Rodriguez has made 1 great film and it was written by Tarantino.

 

[batfan08]

not entirely sure of some of the stuff they are showing here. Jessica Alba looks kind of stupid, some of the dialogue is kind of dumb too

Dumb dialogue!?! How dare you, sir! Frank Miller is the great American novelist of the 20th Century. Forget overhyped trash like Year One and The Dark Knight Returns, one need only read his triumph, "Holy Terror!" to see the man's creative genius. Timeless classics like All-Star Batman & Robin and his seminal entry into film, The Spirit, are in leagues well above the likes of Tennessee Williams or Mark Twain. Man, they really suck. A couple of overrated hacks that pail in comparison to Miller's honest reflections of the human spirit. At our core, what are we, really? Misogynists who hate those who are different than us, and don't even get me started on women. They just think we're sperm banks, amiright? Yeah, I'm right, and so is Miller. PULL OFF THE ROSE COLORED GLASSES PEOPLE! STOP LETTING FEMINISTS AND MINORITIES RULE! WE HAVE A CIVIC DUTY TO PROTECT OUR PROUD LADY LIBERTY! 'MURICA! MILLER 2016!

 

[Sachiel]

Yeah. It's gonna be awesome.

 

[occulum]

it's VERY niche material when converting over to film. It took me a bit to love the first.
Like Hellboy, you create your own "world" in your head when reading the source and have a set way it plays out theatrically. FM's Sin City is really tough to translate the panels into live motion.

I actually understand it when people say they think it's almost unwatchable. But I still really enjoy the film(s)