STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.
Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.
Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!
Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.
Saw Bronson this weekend on Netflix. WOW... Tom Hardy is the ****.
what is this from? ^
Irréversible made my stomach turn, caution if you watch this.
I saw this last night with my girlfriend. Based on comments by people I thought it was going to be a million times more horrific than I thought it was. After it we both just kind of shrugged and then watched episodes of The Wonder Years. I think I am desensitized to most things.
Irreversible is a decent film. The story timeline and the scene at the end of the movie lessens the impact at the end. I think I read somewhere that Gaspar Noe wanted the film to be a giant FU to viewers. His thought was that people like to watch crappy movies, so he was going to make a vulgar, crappy film. For what it is worth, Noe's previous film, I stand Alone, was more disturbing in its subject matter.
Also, saw Bronson a while back and while the movie was sub-par, Tom Hardy was sensational.
People keep telling me to watch the series, "Breaking Bad" but I read the plot and it sounds really stupid to me.
one of the best shows on television without question. i assure you you will not regret watching it. each season is better than the next. trust me on this one, i would not steer you wrong.
I don't know. I am a film nerd and naturally skeptical of any television show. The gf had it on while I was ironing, I couldn't see the screen, but it sounded like a bad soap opera.
Irreversible is a decent film. The story timeline and the scene at the end of the movie lessens the impact at the end. I think I read somewhere that Gaspar Noe wanted the film to be a giant FU to viewers. His thought was that people like to watch crappy movies, so he was going to make a vulgar, crappy film. For what it is worth, Noe's previous film, I stand Alone, was more disturbing in its subject matter.
Also, saw Bronson a while back and while the movie was sub-par, Tom Hardy was sensational.
I think it’s a kind of black cynicism about today’s world that Ellis and certain others depend on for their readership. Look, if the contemporary condition is hopelessly ******, insipid, materialistic, emotionally marsupialed, sadomasochistic, and stupid, then I (or any writer) can get away with slapping together stories with characters who are stupid, vapid, emotionally marsupialed, which is easy, because these sorts of characters require no development. With descriptions that are simply lists of brand-name consumer products. Where stupid people say insipid stuff to each other. If what’s always distinguished bad writing—flat characters, a narrative world that’s cliched and not recognizably human, etc.—is also a description of today’s world, then bad writing becomes an ingenious mimesis of a bad world. If readers simply believe the world is stupid and shallow and mean, then Ellis can write a mean shallow stupid novel that becomes a mordant deadpan commentary on the badness of everything. Look man, we’d probably most of us agree that these are dark times, and stupid ones, but do we need fiction that does nothing but dramatize how dark and stupid everything is? In dark times, the definition of good art would seem to be art that locates and applies CPR to those elements of what’s human and magical that still live and glow despite the times’ darkness. Really good fiction could have as dark a worldview as it wished, but it’d find a way both to depict this world and to illuminate the possibilities for being alive and human in it. You can defend Psycho as being a sort of performative digest of late-eighties social problems, but it’s no more than that.