Movies, Dole, & Thinking For Yourself

Bruce Norbeck MadTom at IX.NETCOM.COM
Sun Jun 11 02:29:12 MDT 1995

        Dennis Putnam, & others:
>Then I mis-understood. I got the clear impression you though that if
>Dole talked about "Cop Killer" as being offensive that he was hypo-
>critical if he didn't also criticize "Trashy Women." I guess I now have
>no idea what your point was and I apologize for being dense.
        Dennis, the whole point of this discussion has been -- at least,
I thought it had been -- the breakdown of societal morals & values, &
whether that breakdown has been aggravated by bad values in popular en-
tertainment. My point was that there are a lot of themes throughout the
country-western spectrum that I would think conservatives would blast as
poor family values, *Trashy Women* being an example. I am not placing it
in the same category as *Cop Killer*, which I also found highly object-
ionable; the mind-set of the musicians involved is entirely different.
That doesn't mean, IMHO, that the one is somehow better or less trashy
than the other.
        Frankly, one of my biggest objections to gangsta rap is that it
seems rather fake. I find it rather difficult to believe that Ice-T has
gone out with a shotgun & killed cops for the hell of it -- mainly be-
cause cops are notoriously protective of their own, & tend to go all out
to catch those who shoot other cops. Gangsta rap does describe people
who do go out & shoot others for the hell of it; it's just that I don't
believe the rappers ever had the guts to do so themselves.
>Right. However, you believe he is not sincere because of his question-
>able motives and timing, so you must think he really beleives this gar-
>bage is OK and won't admit it. At least that is the conclusion one can
>deduce from your statement.
        Fascinating. I question his timing & motives, & that get's
turned into my inference that he actually believes this kind of garbage
is okay but won't admit it. Where did you get that conclusion from? I
guess one CAN draw that conclusion, if one really wanted to do so; but I
find the conclusion utterly unsupported by logic of any sort. Therefore,
I wonder how you managed to draw it. I never said or implied anything of
the sort in any way, shape, or form.
>I refuse to see "Born Killers" based solely on the reviews I have read.
        Your choice. I prefer to see for myself. I'm sorry I wasted my
time & money seeing for myself; but at least I saw for myself.
>I should not have to see an offensive movie before I am allowed to de-
>cide whether or not it is offensive.
        Nobody said you have to. However, I say that you should simply
because that way you know, for yourself, what the movie showed & what it
did not. I greatly prefer to see for myself, rather than rely on what a
reviewer said. If I were to rely solely on reviews, I'd have been rather
confused about *Natural Born Killers*; some reviewers claimed it was ab-
solutely brilliant & a chilling indictment of violence in our society &
the way that the media glorifies violence -- which, BTW, was Stone's
supposed purpose. Others said it was sheer garbage, pretentious slop, &
so on. While I thought the movie was pretty bad -- poorly made, inco-
herent, & sloppy -- I at least could see the point Stone was trying to
make. I just thought he did a very bad job of making his point.
Libertarian, pagan, pot-smoker, patriot -- DON'T TREAD ON ME!
madtom at

More information about the Rushtalk mailing list