Return to Unfiction unforum
 a.r.g.b.b 
FAQ FAQ   Search Search 
 
Welcome!
New users, PLEASE read these forum guidelines. New posters, SEARCH before posting and read these rules before posting your killer new campaign. New players may also wish to peruse the ARG Player Tutorial.

All users must abide by the Terms of Service.
Website Restoration Project
This archiving project is a collaboration between Unfiction and Sean Stacey (SpaceBass), Brian Enigma (BrianEnigma), and Laura E. Hall (lehall) with
the Center for Immersive Arts.
Announcements
This is a static snapshot of the
Unfiction forums, as of
July 23, 2017.
This site is intended as an archive to chronicle the history of Alternate Reality Games.
  

The time now is Tue Nov 26, 2024 6:16 am
All times are UTC - 4 (DST in action)		 View posts in this forum since last visit
View unanswered posts in this forum
Calendar
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
[SPOILER]New Pic still from film
View previous topicView next topic
Page 3 of 4 [46 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Author Message
Cole
Account Disabled


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 271

 		Re: [DVD spec]
xboyonfirex wrote:
I think it would be pretty cool if the DVD came out with 2 different versions of the same film. One in the P.O.V. perspective, the other as a regular film. Like- all these snapshots we're seeing would be from the 'regular filmed' version. I know it's not gonna happen, but it would be an interesting perspective to see how this movie would have done as a regular... movie?


haha I'd like to see the "uncut" version where HUD WASN'T taping over it lol.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:33 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Cole
Account Disabled


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 271
STOB wrote:
Headman wrote:
Thank you very much, my kids are 10, 14 and 15. They will be OK with the violence, unlsess STOB thinks they should not go?


Oh kiss my ass. I merely shocked that you are more concerned with a chick covered with a sheet than you are with sustained violence. Rolling Eyes


careful! or the "mods" might PM you!!.....and yes I'm being sarcastic.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:37 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
konamouse
Official uF Dietitian


Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 8010
Location: My own alternate reality

 		It's funny that in Europe, violence is considered worse (rated adult) than sex or naked bodies (seen on regular television).

I tend to agree with the European version. The human body is beautiful (most of the time) and violence/gore is not appropriate for young children. But in the US (especially in the south and southeast) I may be in the minority.
_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:52 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Headman
Entrenched


Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Michigan
Her wrote:
STOB wrote:
Headman wrote:
Is there brief nudity in the film? I ask because my kids want to see the movie.


You're worried about brief nudity in a violence- and gore-filled movie? Seriously?! With open chest cavaties and exploding people and crazy ass little monsters?

I can't be the only person who sees anything wrong with this, right? Shocked


This was how I used to handle it:

My kids know movie violence is not real blood. We used to have discussions about how the scenes were made. Sweeney Todd is an excellent example: (we are planning on making our own fake blood from corn syrup and red dye.) Now I wouldn't let them see Saw or Hostle, gore is a different animal altogether. However, Alien, Jurassic Park, so forth are okay for them to see. If i am unsure about a film, I see it first.

However, sexual content is not okay for them to watch. Kids should be kids and I don't want to open up that discussion with them over a movie scene. I prefer to discuss the birds and bees on my terms, it goes much better that way.

So in short, blood is nothing compared to a bedroom scene.


I agree, and thank you. That is exactly why I asked the question. We do the very same with our kids. There are some great movies out there that my kids would enjoy if it were not for the nudity or sex scenes.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:54 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Headman
Entrenched


Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Michigan
STOB wrote:
Headman wrote:
Thank you very much, my kids are 10, 14 and 15. They will be OK with the violence, unlsess STOB thinks they should not go?


Oh kiss my ass. I merely shocked that you are more concerned with a chick covered with a sheet than you are with sustained violence. Rolling Eyes


Sustained violence? Since when did Cloverfield become "The Devils Rejects"? I apreciate your concern, but I think Cloverfield will be safe for my kids to watch.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:59 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Cole
Account Disabled


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 271

 		nah, I'm sorry but I'm with Headman on this one, for some parents, nudity or sexual related content can be more harmful to younger audiences than violence. Personally, if I was old enough to have a child of my own I'd let them watch more blood and gore before I let them see ANY sexual activity, violence has become a very accepted form of entertainment in today's society and though sex is also on the rise especially for commercial use, there are some things that are best left for parents to explain to their children than their children learning on their own and not knowing what to make of it!

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:10 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
SuperSquirrel
Unfettered


Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 396

 		And yet look at the violence in todays youth in America. Kid fighting and killing one another, guns in schools, threats, kids killing thier parents...but I am sure they didn't learn all of that from violent films, violent games, and violent music...

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:19 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Headman
Entrenched


Joined: 26 Aug 2007
Posts: 839
Location: Michigan
Cole wrote:
nah, I'm sorry but I'm with Headman on this one, for some parents, nudity or sexual related content can be more harmful to younger audiences than violence. Personally, if I was old enough to have a child of my own I'd let them watch more blood and gore before I let them see ANY sexual activity, violence has become a very accepted form of entertainment in today's society and though sex is also on the rise especially for commercial use, there are some things that are best left for parents to explain to their children than their children learning on their own and not knowing what to make of it!


Thank you Cole.

SuperSquirrel wrote:
And yet look at the violence in todays youth in America. Kid fighting and killing one another, guns in schools, threats, kids killing thier parents...but I am sure they didn't learn all of that from violent films, violent games, and violent music...


While I agree with you that violent films, violent games, and violent music play a role in todays aggressive youth the majority of the blame rests on the parents shoulders. In my opinion it is not the film/music/game producers responsibility to shelter/screen/teach the youth right from wrong and reality from fantasy. That is our job as parents. There is also a difference in violence between humans monsters and aliens verses violence by people against people.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:29 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Inox
Greenhorn


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 4
Cole wrote:
nah, I'm sorry but I'm with Headman on this one, for some parents, nudity or sexual related content can be more harmful to younger audiences than violence.


Does that make it objectively more harmful, though? Or is it just that they, as parents, are more uptight about it?

I think it's a real problem with our society that people are more comfortable with gore, violence (simulated or not), and horror than they are with even "brief nudity".

How is that possibly healthy? How is the naked human body, or an awareness of sexuality, inherently unhealthy for older children and teens?

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:42 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Cole
Account Disabled


Joined: 14 Aug 2007
Posts: 271
Inox wrote:
Cole wrote:
nah, I'm sorry but I'm with Headman on this one, for some parents, nudity or sexual related content can be more harmful to younger audiences than violence.


Does that make it objectively more harmful, though? Or is it just that they, as parents, are more uptight about it?

I think it's a real problem with our society that people are more comfortable with gore, violence (simulated or not), and horror than they are with even "brief nudity".

How is that possibly healthy? How is the naked human body, or an awareness of sexuality, inherently unhealthy for older children and teens?


ok, I myself am a Graphic Art Student in college, therefore I understand the artistic nature of some sexually explicit material, we know when nudity is acceptable for art and when it's to be interpreted as porn, huge difference! Now statistically, where are you seeing most of the violence from youth? More in the "rough" parts of the United States, why? Not because of video games and movies but because of their environment and parenting. I live in VA and one of the roughest spots in the state is Richmond. My best friend lives there and goes to school there, I visit him every now and then and let me tell ya, I would NEVER live in Richmond VA, youth down there are rude, rough, and simply juvenile, do I think video games, movies and music did that to them? No, their environment did. They're parents don't CARE about them!...not the whole richmond area, just the case where the rough parts are. Do you know how high the teen pregnancy rate is?? It's quite alarming, and this is coming from a 22 year old here!! I'll admit, I'm not a virgin but after going through the experience, I can safely say that the media DOES have effect on the social acceptance of sexual material among the youth and it's something that I WILL be watching out for when I have children of my own.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 6:54 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
SuperSquirrel
Unfettered


Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 396

 		I completly, agree...
SuperSquirrel wrote:
And yet look at the violence in todays youth in America. Kid fighting and killing one another, guns in schools, threats, kids killing thier parents...but I am sure they didn't learn all of that from violent films, violent games, and violent music...


While I agree with you that violent films, violent games, and violent music play a role in todays aggressive youth the majority of the blame rests on the parents shoulders. In my opinion it is not the film/music/game producers responsibility to shelter/screen/teach the youth right from wrong and reality from fantasy. That is our job as parents. There is also a difference in violence between humans monsters and aliens verses violence by people against people.[/quote]

But, do be the devil's advocate, parantes hands are restraind as well, when a parent cannot discipline thier children for fear of societal reprocussions we are in a sad state...I blame the liberals.. Very Happy

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:20 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
konamouse
Official uF Dietitian


Joined: 02 Dec 2002
Posts: 8010
Location: My own alternate reality

 		I agree with Cole in that children are the product of what they are taught by their parents. Crying or Very sad

I grew up with a parent who thought there was nothing wrong in the human body, learned where babies came from before I heard about storks and cabbage patches, and that caring for another human was much better than hitting them. I would not advocate porn or visual sexual acts in front of children and still don't appreciate "gratuitous" sex/nudity in TV or movies.

To me, graphic violence is just as bad as porn - most of the time it's just too much and unnecessary in order to meet the dramatic needs of the TV or movie (or video game).
_________________
'squeek'
r u a Sammeeeee? I am Forever!

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:21 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Inox
Greenhorn


Joined: 13 Jan 2008
Posts: 4
Cole wrote:
Inox wrote:
Cole wrote:
nah, I'm sorry but I'm with Headman on this one, for some parents, nudity or sexual related content can be more harmful to younger audiences than violence.


Does that make it objectively more harmful, though? Or is it just that they, as parents, are more uptight about it?

I think it's a real problem with our society that people are more comfortable with gore, violence (simulated or not), and horror than they are with even "brief nudity".

How is that possibly healthy? How is the naked human body, or an awareness of sexuality, inherently unhealthy for older children and teens?


ok, I myself am a Graphic Art Student in college, therefore I understand the artistic nature of some sexually explicit material, we know when nudity is acceptable for art and when it's to be interpreted as porn, huge difference! Now statistically, where are you seeing most of the violence from youth? More in the "rough" parts of the United States, why? Not because of video games and movies but because of their environment and parenting. I live in VA and one of the roughest spots in the state is Richmond. My best friend lives there and goes to school there, I visit him every now and then and let me tell ya, I would NEVER live in Richmond VA, youth down there are rude, rough, and simply juvenile, do I think video games, movies and music did that to them? No, their environment did. They're parents don't CARE about them!...not the whole richmond area, just the case where the rough parts are. Do you know how high the teen pregnancy rate is?? It's quite alarming, and this is coming from a 22 year old here!! I'll admit, I'm not a virgin but after going through the experience, I can safely say that the media DOES have effect on the social acceptance of sexual material among the youth and it's something that I WILL be watching out for when I have children of my own.


Actually, in a way, you're making an important point for me: the most important factor in determining the choices a child makes is the quality of the parenting. Namely, that a good parent is a continual and active participant in the child's life, and teaches them to make the right choices.

However, that really has nothing to do with whether it's objectively healthier for a child to be exposed to gore or to nudity.

There's nothing inherently unhealthy about the human form, and "brief nudity" does not damage adolescent minds. The psychological jury is still out on gore and simulated violence, but school shooters don't tend to spend the time before their sprees looking at boobs, if you get me.

If there is decent parenting, then neither type of exposure is likely to lead to any sort of undesirable conduct. All the same, if you were going to be concerned about one or the other, it seems odd to focus on the "brief nudity."

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 7:26 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Vendicare
Boot

Joined: 16 Nov 2007
Posts: 45

 		I have three kids (15, 13, and 9), and I have MUCH less problem with nudity than violence. Obviously, I don't want my kids to watch people having sex, but they have all seen nudity in art. I would never risk giving them a negative view of the human body by inferring that I have to protect them from a brief glimpse of nudity.

I do need to protect them from viewing violence. There is no need for it in most cases, and it is, many times, used as entertainment, and a boost for a story, without justification.

Sorry so long, but I wanted to add my viewpoint as a conservative Catholic mom of kids that run the spectrum of ages.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 8:03 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
xboyonfirex
Entrenched


Joined: 05 Dec 2007
Posts: 1069
Vendicare wrote:
I have three kids (15, 13, and 9), and I have MUCH less problem with nudity than violence. Obviously, I don't want my kids to watch people having sex, but they have all seen nudity in art. I would never risk giving them a negative view of the human body by inferring that I have to protect them from a brief glimpse of nudity.

I do need to protect them from viewing violence. There is no need for it in most cases, and it is, many times, used as entertainment, and a boost for a story, without justification.

Sorry so long, but I wanted to add my viewpoint as a conservative Catholic mom of kids that run the spectrum of ages.


While I agree with you on a certain level, we should always be reminded of our humanity. Graphic violence is often times an uneeded element in life all around, but at the same time- it reminds us that we're humanity, those feelings we get when we see death [whether it be fictional or actual] that's recognition that life is short and can be shorter, that life isn't always sunshine and cherry pies. We can never truly understand how good life is, until we can understand how terrible it can be.

PostPosted: Sun Jan 13, 2008 8:12 pm
 View user's profile
 Back to top 
Display posts from previous:   Sort by:   
Page 3 of 4 [46 Posts]   Goto page: Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
View previous topicView next topic
 Forum index » Archive » Archive: Cloverfield (1-18-08) » Cloverfield: General / Updates
Jump to:  


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
You cannot post calendar events in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group