Ridiculous stuff I just found

Anything else on your mind that you would like to discuss with other like-minded people.

Moderators: Mini Forklift Ⓥ, C.O., Richard, robert, SyrLinus

Message
Author
User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

Ridiculous stuff I just found

#1 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:41 pm

I was browsing for information about The Blair Witch project, when I came across this:

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/blairwitch.htm

I can barely believe how pedantic it is. Look at the scale at the bottom of the page also:

Image

Note how (as far as I can tell) they think that homosexuality is something which needs to be monitored. Whattjatalkinbaat??

User avatar
Sknydpr
Manatee
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:40 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

#2 Postby Sknydpr » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:44 pm

Hmmm. Wonder where my picture of the Bare Witch Project went...?

User avatar
michaelhobson
Elephant
Posts: 2292
Joined: Wed May 04, 2005 3:33 pm
Location: Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Contact:

#3 Postby michaelhobson » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:45 pm

I disagree with the chart, there was not nearly enough sex in the movie.

I do agree that there wasn't enough wanton violence and not nearly enough offense to god. :D

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#4 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:45 pm

Argh I cannot believe what I'm reading:

"One hundred thirty seven uses of the most foul of the foul words. *The Blair Witch Project* actually beat *South Park:BLU* in use of the most foul of the foul words. Also were 71 uses of other three/four letter foul words PLUS 17 uses of God's name in vain, 6 of which were with the foul letter expletive and 3 of which were vain use of the name of our Savior. All other ignominy were paled by such a flip-off attitude. Yet one more excuse to lower standards of acceptance I suppose."

I think they have their priorities all wrong

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#5 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:46 pm

An explanation of the chart: things which score near 100 are 'morally acceptable'. The lower the score, the more immoral it is. So Blair Witch gets 0 / 100 for offense to God. Meaning that it has totally offended God. I bet He is totally P'D TO THE O about Blair Witch.

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#6 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 3:56 pm

Ouch, Butterfly Effect, they really were offended by!!

Image

I thought Butterfly Effect was an incredibly moral film which taught self-sacrifice! I totally don't get this website

OMGOMG ETC

Check out what negative things they have to say about Butterfly Effect! I can't believe it: (from a list of reasons why the film is immoral)

"punk/goth, repeatedly
facial/body piercings, repeatedly
massive tattoos"

The first "punk/goth, repeatedly" I can only assume means that there were goths/punks in the film!!! Oh how terrible! Cover your eyes!

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#7 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:16 pm

Sorry to keep posting, but you've GOT TO BE KIDDING ME. Finding Nemo, doesn't get a perfect score. Here's why: (I have high-lighted the particularly ridiculous)

"attack to eat with a father's loss of his entire family (400+) but one - Nemo (non-graphic)
fright factors
additional attacks to eat
series of posterior references and jokes/comments by young adolescents
adolescent defiance
"I hate you" from adolescent son to father
suggestion of flatulence"


Okay. Anyway, the film is about fish anyway. So they say that an attack on fish is immoral? So a film in which people eat fish should be immoral too right? Well they don't say so in other films. They just seem to want to say that everything is immoral, and they're totally inconsistent pahalyaahaaaaa (that's not a real word).

Freddy VS Jason scores ZERO, meaning that the film is totally immoral. Haha.

User avatar
madcat
Manatee
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: portland

#8 Postby madcat » Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:33 pm

What site is that from?

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#9 Postby Richard » Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:37 pm

The site I posted in my initial post:

http://www.capalert.com

you can see a list of films they have commented upon here:

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/

High stupidity

User avatar
madcat
Manatee
Posts: 492
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: portland

#10 Postby madcat » Thu Sep 22, 2005 4:38 pm

if you want to see f*cked up look at this

http://www.virusmyth.net/aids/

User avatar
Daywalker
Elephant
Posts: 1869
Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2005 3:38 pm
Location: Vegan Strength Cult, German HQ
Contact:

#11 Postby Daywalker » Fri Sep 23, 2005 4:18 am

:lol:

Thanks for the laugh, Richard!

But i agree with the CAP on this part:

*The Blair Witch Project* was an empty movie. There was nothing there except attempts at fright. It was bare of any need for intelligence. Void of any special effects, this film relied on our supposed innate fear of the unseen to project its impact.

I thought Blair witch was crap, too.
Though i wasn't exactly offended by it. Hm. I'm not divine enough, probably.
No one said it would be easy.

User avatar
Sknydpr
Manatee
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:40 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

#12 Postby Sknydpr » Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:52 pm

The Bare Witch Project:

Image

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#13 Postby Richard » Fri Sep 23, 2005 12:57 pm

What is the mum doing? Covering the boy's ear? Ha

User avatar
Sknydpr
Manatee
Posts: 276
Joined: Wed Jun 01, 2005 12:40 pm
Location: Houston, TX
Contact:

#14 Postby Sknydpr » Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:00 pm

She's still reaching to cover his eyes, silly kniggit.

User avatar
Richard
Site Admin
Posts: 6064
Age: 34
Joined: Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm
Location: England
Contact:

#15 Postby Richard » Fri Sep 23, 2005 1:37 pm

Ahoy, it makes sense


Return to “General Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests