my profile | my password | search | faq & rules | forum home

» Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE   » Community   » The Afterlife   » Deadwood, HBO -- Opinions? (Page 1)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Author Topic: Deadwood, HBO -- Opinions? Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-05-2004 12:45 AM                     I've been watching "Deadwood" on HBO, probably just out of convenience since it follows "The Sopranos" on Sunday night. The show overall is pretty good, but with some dramatic missteps along the way. One well to do character was killed off on tonight's episode and any idiot could have seen that one coming. How could someone so stupid get rich in the first place? Oh wait, I almost forgot. He did it the old fashioned way, being born that way. Oh well. Anyway, that's not really my point for posting something about a TV show in this forum. The reason: I don't think I have ever seen a show whose dialog was riddled with anywhere near this much profanity. The F-bombs were so numerous I tried to make a game out of counting them in tonight's episode. The show was not even half through when I lost track of the count at around 33 F-words. Lots of c**t and c***sucker bombs thrown in for good measure. Ian McShane had 5 F-words spoken in a short scene early in the show. This much profanity is not just numbing after awhile, it's really pretty distracting. I don't know if I'll be able to stay with this show through the rest of its season if it keeps up this pace.  |  IP: Logged Ron Yost Master Film Handler Posts: 344 From: Paso Robles, CA Registered: Aug 2003 posted 04-07-2004 10:07 PM                     Guess only you and I watch it, Bobby. I see on the HBO Deadwood website that HBO has picked it up for another season. It must be doing pretty well for them. I like it too, but agree the language of mostly two characters .. Al Swearingen [swearing.. clever, no? ] and Calamity Jane is waaaaay over the top. I'm no prude, but gimme a break! Wonder if Wild Bill will make it out of Deadwood alive on TV? He didn't in real life, if I recall correctly. HBO is repeating the first three episodes this weekend .. Saturday night, I think? Hide the kiddies, tho. Ron Yost  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-07-2004 10:18 PM                     I watched the first three episodes last night I had recorded on my DVR, and I found the language to be rather strong, as well. And Im no prude. I think the series finally started hitting its stride in episode 3, and the language seemed to subside somewhat (or maybe watching the three episodes back-to-back de-sensitized me). Anyway, I'll think I'll stick with it.  |  IP: Logged Brad Allen Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 688 From: Evansville, IN, USA Registered: May 2000 posted 04-09-2004 02:25 PM                     I've been watching, will probably not continue, the talk gets real old.  |  IP: Logged Joe Redifer You need a beating today Posts: 12859 From: Denver, Colorado Registered: May 99 posted 04-09-2004 05:03 PM                        I haven't seen this since I refuse to pay for television, but I heard they showed a naked guy come out of his room with a fully erect penis with pussy-goo all over it, claiming he wasn't done. Sounds like quality television!  |  IP: Logged Steve Anderson Expert Film Handler Posts: 168 From: Nashville, TN Registered: Feb 2000 posted 04-11-2004 10:32 AM                        So Joe do you wait till it is released on DVD and burn yourself a copy? Hey since I got my burner I have been Hollywood Videos best client.  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 04-11-2004 03:17 PM                     quote: they showed a naked guy come out of his room with a fully erect penis with pussy-goo all over it Well, they didn't actually SHOW the erect penis, but the gist of the scene is correct. quote: Hey since I got my burner I have been Hollywood Videos best client. Umm, are we supposed to be talking about the joys of copyright violations in here?  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 04-11-2004 03:38 PM                     Considering most DVDs take up two data layers, it seems like a waste of time to copy them. Even if you're doing so from a standpoint of making a legal backup copy of your own store bought discs. I'm not a fan of splitting a movie across two discs (or two sides) unless it is a long movie. And the extra compression apps like DVD-XCopy uses to squeeze a DVD-9 movie onto a DVD-R disc often makes the dub look terrible. Back to the subject of the show, yeah this show has some nudity in it. The scene mentioned with the guy running around with his wang in his hand was pretty disgusting. Even the few scenes the show has had with naked women weren't all that pleasing either. One of the prostitutes in the show was badly beaten by clients, so she shot one of the violators in the head. She's shown climbing into Al Swearin-a-lot's bed with her face still badly bruised.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-24-2005 11:39 PM                        Well it's been a year (almost) since the last post and I'm really hooked on this show. Turns out a great deal of it is factual. Anybody else watching?  |  IP: Logged Paul Linfesty Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1383 From: Bakersfield, CA, USA Registered: Nov 1999 posted 03-25-2005 01:32 AM                     OK. I basically gave up on the show after Wild Bill Hitchcock was killed off early in season 1. The language was bothersome to me. And yet... HBO ran a marathon of back to back to back episodes for a week leading up to the season 2 premiere. So I gave the show a second chance and started it from the beginning. It is now my favorite show on TV (Oh, wait. It's not TV, it's HBO. Since they paid a fortune for an agency to come up with that tagline, I should honor them by repeating it. And they will honor me with a free subscription!) I guess I was kinda wrong about the penis thing. On closer examination, I don't think it was really erect, though. It just looked it, cause the guy was holding it straight out in his hands. The language is either settling down, or I have become used to it.  |  IP: Logged Adam Martin I'm not even gonna point out the irony. Posts: 3686 From: Dallas, TX Registered: Nov 2000 posted 03-25-2005 01:42 AM                     I think you're used to the language. I saw this for the first time while I was in a hotel room somewhere and all I got out of the envelope was a couple of guys think everyone other guy is a cocksucker (and constantly remind everyone of the fact) and there's this gal who actually *is* a cocksucker and keeps offering people blowjobs.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-25-2005 08:58 AM                        I got the first season on DVD and on the last disk there's an interesting interview with the producer. Turns out the bad language is pretty accurate and was used by men and women as a defense mechanism. Guess they figured if they talked real tough it would fend off any aggressive hostilities. Many of the characters are real. Swearengen did exist and ran the saloon where it is estimated he made $4k-$6k per day (back then!). The sheriff is/was real too and was of the same type character as that portrayed. A pretty "gritty" show  |  IP: Logged Dean Kollet Jedi Master Film Handler Posts: 591 From: Florida State University Registered: Jul 2003 posted 03-25-2005 09:32 AM                     I watched the first couple of shows to check it out, and I honestly just can't get used to it. I guess it seems real to life or whatever they claim, but I highly doubt they talked like that back in those days, I didn't think 1/2 of the words they say were't around until 50-60 years ago.  |  IP: Logged Greg Mueller Phenomenal Film Handler Posts: 1687 From: Port Gamble, WA Registered: Jun 99 posted 03-25-2005 05:04 PM                        Maybe, but on the other hand.... I once dated a college English teacher who said the origin of one of the most commonly used swear terms comes from the term.....Familiarity Under Carnal Knowledge..... Which dated to mid-evil England. Or if you preferr.... a difficult word to trace, in part because it was taboo to the editors of the original OED when the "F" volume was compiled, 1893-97. Written form only attested from early 16c. OED 2nd edition cites 1503, in the form fukkit; earliest appearance of current spelling is 1535 -- "Bischops ... may fuck thair fill and be vnmaryit" [Sir David Lyndesay, "Ane Satyre of the Thrie Estaits"], but presumably it is a much more ancient word than that, simply one that wasn't likely to be written in the kind of texts that have survived from O.E. and M.E. Buck cites proper name John le Fucker from 1278. The word apparently is hinted at in a scurrilous 15c. poem, titled "Flen flyys," written in bastard L. and M.E. The relevant line reads: Non sunt in celi quia fuccant uuiuys of heli Shit... O.E. scitan, from P.Gmc. *skit-, from PIE *skheid- "split, divide, separate." Related to shed (v.) on the notion of "separation" from the body (cf. L. excrementum, from excernere "to separate"). It is thus a cousin to science and conscience. The noun is O.E. scitte "purging;" sense of "excrement" dates from 1585, from the verb. Despite what you read in an e-mail, "shit" is not an acronym. The notion that it is a recent word may be because the word was taboo from c.1600 and rarely appeared in print (neither Shakespeare not the KJV has it), and even in "vulgar" publications of the late 18c. it is disguised by dashes. It drew the wrath of censors as late as 1922 ("Ulysses" and "The Enormous Room"), scandalized magazine subscribers in 1957 (a Hemingway story in "Atlantic Monthly") and was omitted from some dictionaries as recently as 1970 ("Webster's New World"). Extensive slang usage; verb meaning "to lie, to tease" is from 1934; that of "to disrespect" is from 1903. Noun use for "obnoxious person" is since at least 1508; meaning "misfortune, trouble" is attested from 1937. Shat is a humorous past tense form, not etymological, first recorded 18c. Shite, now a jocular or slightly euphemistic variant, formerly a dialectal variant, reflects the vowel in the O.E. verb (cf. Ger. scheissen). Shit-faced "drunk" is 1960s student slang; shit list is from 1942. To not give a shit "not care" is from 1922; up shit creek "in trouble" is from 1937. Scared shitless first recorded 1936. Cock and it's derivatives.... O.E. cocc, O.Fr. coq, O.N. kokkr, all of echoic origin. O.E. cocc was a nickname for "one who strutted like a cock," thus a common term in the Middle Ages for a pert boy, used of scullions, apprentices, servants, etc. A common personal name till c.1500, it was affixed to Christian names as a pet diminutive, cf. Wilcox, Hitchcock, etc. Slang sense of "penis" is attested since 1618 (but cf. pillicock "penis," from c.1300). Cock-teaser is from 1891. Cock-sucker is used curiously for aggressively obnoxious men; the ancients would have understood the difference between passive and active roles; Catullus, writing of his boss, employs the useful L. insult irrumator, which means "someone who forces others to give him oral sex," hence "one who treats people with contempt." Cocky "arrogantly pert" (1768) originally meant "lecherous" (16c.); modern sense of "vain" is 18c. A cocker spaniel (1823) was trained to start woodcocks. Cock-and-bull is first recorded 1621, perhaps an allusion to Aesop's fables, with their incredible talking animals, or to a particular story, now forgotten. Fr. has parallel expression coq-à-l'âne.  |  IP: Logged Bobby Henderson "Ask me about Trajan." Posts: 10973 From: Lawton, OK, USA Registered: Apr 2001 posted 03-26-2005 12:59 AM                     My parents like "Deadwood," but my mother jokingly calls it "Cursewood."  |  IP: Logged

All times are Central (GMT -6:00)

This topic comprises 2 pages: 1  2

Printer-friendly view of this topic

Hop To: Select a Forum: Category: Operations -------------------- Digital Cinema Forum Film Handlers' Forum Large Format Forum Ground Level Feature Info, Trailer Attachments & REAL Credit Offsets Category: Community -------------------- Film-Yak Film Handlers' Movie Reviews The Afterlife Bob Maar's Joke-A-Thon Category: Classified -------------------- Equipment and Supplies Wanted/For Sale Help Wanted/Seeking Employment Category: System -------------------- Software Beta Testing Forum

The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.