The Girl Next Door

[Ghostboy]

-- well, I'm weak, what can I say

I think this is the key point to consider here: SoNowThen has proven on here to have very good taste in many regards and can speak eloquently about his likes and dislikes, but I don't think it's degrading for him -- or anyone else, including myself -- to admit to indulging in something less than high art, and to enjoying a base level of entertaiment that plays upon a base level of desire. I think it's safe to say that most people on this board are, in their proclamations of hotness, simply responding to hormonal urges brought about by the sight of beautiful people onscreen, and, in the case of a movie like this, acknowledging that that's what it's there for.

I find myself on a hypocritical rift sometimes, since I support intellectual stimulation with all my heart and yet cannot completely decry the sight of an attractive and/or scantily clad woman on a magazine cover or movie poster. In other words, I sympathize with both sides of this argument, and take solace in my belief that the vast majority of people here are not slaves to their loins but simply in tune, if not in complete and total control,  with them.

Lastly, I think 'hot' is on the verge of simply becoming alluringly complementary slang (rather than lustily derogatory), as evidenced by the wide belief that Tina Fey is hot. In smarter circles like this one, brains have as much, if not more, to do with hotness as bosoms.

[godardian]

I guess this is (yet another case of ) where you and I differ.

As a hopeful future filmmaker, the hotness of my lead actress is of paramount importance. Also, I wouldn't call porn "morally superior" to this movie, but I see what you're getting at.

And to get all off course, in regards the Godard quote, I think he did his share of objectifying, sometimes with nothing more than his dick in mind. Which is fine by me, most great male filmmakers used their cock as their muse. You can't tell me that JLG wasn't fucking Anna K with his camera in Petit Soldat.

I figured you'd know that what I meant was that porn is more upfront about its agenda.

I think that when I find a particular male or female actor sexually arousing, it's easy for me to say the director is "fucking" them with his or her camera, but it's difficult to support that claim when speaking with someone who isn't aroused by same actor. Unless it's really, really obvious. Compare any of Godard's films with Fight Club to see the difference between "relatively speaking, it seemed as though the director was fucking the actor with his camera" and "that couldn't be less of a turn-on to me, but the camera-fucking was too obvious to ignore."

I would refer you to Godard's reasons for showing Bardot's ass, and the way he showed it, in Contempt. In that case, he objectified in the most subversive way he could, because he thought it was silly to be gratuitous (and really, the level of gratuitousness makes all the difference when we're talking about nudity, sex, physical appearances, and whether they're being crassly exploited or utilized in a way that's artistically "right"). In any case, I don't think he ever objectified in the one-dimensional, purely libidinous, creatively ill-advised way so much Hollywood product always has. He may have acknowledged the beauty of his lead actresses (and actors, I would add), but he didn't let that get in the way of what he was doing. He wasn't disproportionate about it in a self-indulgent way.

[godardian]

-- well, I'm weak, what can I say

I think this is the key point to consider here: SoNowThen has proven on here to have very good taste in many regards and can speak eloquently about his likes and dislikes, but I don't think it's degrading for him -- or anyone else, including myself -- to admit to indulging in something less than high art, and to enjoying a base level of entertaiment that plays upon a base level of desire. I think it's safe to say that most people on this board are, in their proclamations of hotness, simply responding to hormonal urges brought about by the sight of beautiful people onscreen, and, in the case of a movie like this, acknowledging that that's what it's there for.

I find myself on a hypocritical rift sometimes, since I support intellectual stimulation with all my heart and yet cannot completely decry the sight of an attractive and/or scantily clad woman on a magazine cover or movie poster. In other words, I sympathize with both sides of this argument, and take solace in my belief that the vast majority of people here are not slaves to their loins but simply in tune, if not in complete and total control,  with them.

Lastly, I think 'hot' is on the verge of simply becoming alluringly complementary slang (rather than lustily derogatory), as evidenced by the wide belief that Tina Fey is hot. In smarter circles like this one, brains have as much, if not more, to do with hotness as bosoms.

For me, it's all about what's excluded (or not) in service of "the hotness." There's absolutely nothing wrong with saying you think someone onscreen is very attractive, but I think the focus on that is really disproportionate at times, especially here. It's the excessive fixation on what we find attractive in the actors in a movie that I think leads to both flawed perceptions of a film's qualities and a level of discussion that's just not interesting for those who want to talk about the movie and the characters and the director and the script and the lighting and the editing and, if there's time or it's especially compelling, how nice it was to be able to look at someone very attractive,  apart from the considerations of what the film was or how good it was or what its intentions were, etc.

[ono]

All I want to add is a comment on the intention of the Godard quote, which is the most intruging bit about this little debate.

What he meant when he said "boys photographing girls" is simply that all throughout cinema, we have always seen things from a man's point of view, and oftentimes, films have made it a point to show this POV, and meditate on how a man thinks of a woman, be it her looks or something else.  So many films have this undercurrent running through it that it's impossible to escape, from High Fidelity to That Obscure Object of Desire.  This is primarily because so few women directors have been successful yet (and there have been very few women directors to make a compelling film, Sofia Coppola notwithstanding, and no, Kimberly Peirce wasn't one -- Boys Don't Cry was a pile of crap).

Wow, talk about your tangents.

Oh, and Tina Fey is "hot" not only because of her smarts, but because of her wit, her talent, and yeah, she's just really pretty too.  That's just the icing on the cake.  It's the glasses.  Definitely the glasses.

[cine]

Oh, and Tina Fey is "hot" not only because of her smarts, but because of her wit, her talent, and yeah, she's just really pretty too.  That's just the icing on the cake.  It's the glasses.  Definitely the glasses.

I guess you could say she puts the "Up" in "Weekend Update."

[Ghostboy]

Hmmm. I suppose I might still remember too clearly those high school circles who think anything with long legs and big breasts (or tight pecs and a fast car) is not only the epitome of hotness but the very center of the meaning of life, by comparison to which this board is a veritible haven of intellectual stimulation. Either that, or I'm not reading the right threads.

[ono]

Hmmm. I suppose I might still remember too clearly those high school circles who think anything with long legs and big breasts (or tight pecs and a fast car) is not only the epitome of hotness but the very center of the meaning of life, by comparison to which this board is a veritible haven of intellectual stimulation. Either that, or I'm not reading the right threads.

Well, I agree that this board is a haven of intellectual stimulation, but it all depends on where you look.  What Mac drives at a lot is that women aren't given the respect they deserve, and it brings them down when they are commented for their looks and not their talent.  This is obvious to anyone with half a brain, but still it seems to escape some people.  And since this place is good for intellectual stimulation and testosteroney treats, so to speak, the two kind of clash against each other at times.  This, too, is probably wholly obvious.

Point being that in criticism, you should concentrate on the performances.  SoNowThen and Cecil and the like can still make all the films they like with the lewd interpretation of the Godard quote in mind, and still, that caveman-esque side of all of us will probably line up in droves to see it.  The balance comes when some women directors start building up the cache to exploit "pretty boys" just as much as men have exploited women.  Won't that be fun?

[Ghostboy]

Well, I know I for one miss myadopteddaughter's avatar, or even Ravi's interpretation of it...

[Banky]

man she is fucking smoking isnt she

[Gold Trumpet]

yeah, if so much of the time, money, and effort is spent pre-, during, and post-production to make the actress look hot, then pointing out the hotness of the actress would be every bit as relevant as any other areas of criticism towards the film.

This is the key point to this entire discussion. During the argument, I kept wondering why it was being discussed in relation to The Girl Next Door. Cuthbert's hotness is the entire point of the film! Its obvious Godardian never seen it or has any intention to do so, maybe true too for MacGuffin. If this film was 21 Grams and an honest performance was brought down to someone squealing over how Naomi Watt's tits were fantastic, then I'd see the justification. Everyone just realize how low ball this film is and actually criticize that. I like that James Joyce wrote some of the most intellectual fiction of the 20th century and still frequented whore houses with little remorse.

[MacGuffin]

This is what I'm talking about, and Duderino, I'm sorry I have to call you out, but your comments were the easiest to find:

how can you look at that pic and not get a hard on? (unless you have nothing able to get hard)

jim carrey was great and kate winslet was at the top of her game and she was so beautiful.

natalie portman's so hot

totally agreed. she's so beautiful

sarah polley is hot

Meg White is a shittttttttty actress.

i believe it. she's cute though

eyes wide shut was rated R and it's got some pretty "hot" scenes in there

you didnt really get a good look at them either

yeah, google never gives you free porn.....sucks.....use yahoo

though the movie doesnt look very good, i'll see it for kelly macdonald.

wait, is this forum comparing who's a better Clarice? because if so, i gotta go with Jodie, even though i think Julianne is sooo much hotter and a better actress.

i went to a screening way back when and Nora Jane-Noone was there for a Q and A, she's so great and really hot in person.

she's a good actress. I didnt know she was married to David E. Kelly, that lucky bastard.

woof, jessica biel is, may i say "bootylicious?"

i said GOD DAAAAAAAAMN!

amen brother

One more thing, I'm not a lesbian, but Linda in that red bikini does it for me.  

i remember the first time i saw that, i was doing the same exact thing as Judge Reinhold.

wow.....Uma is so beautiful:

I'm surprised you didn't mention how hot the playboy chicks were in your review.

you're totally right...i love when they rush the stage. but seriously, during the sex scenes, they're so hot. "susie q" is still in my head

I stopped after 10 pages...


Now, what I'm talking about really has nothing to do with Girl Next Door, and I would go see it, but my motives are not because I heard Cuthbert is naked in it; it's really that I'll go see anything. What I meant when I said 'that's apparently all actresses are good for nowadays' is - I see a pattern in how actresses are discussed. That's all. Nothing more. It was just a comment, just like the one in the 25th Hour thread, and the combination of those two got to me enough that what I said just happened to land in this thread; not meant to make everyone all PC. Again, not calling Chest out. Reread my quote that started this all and you'll see it's just an out loud thought. Have I made myself clear now?

[El Duderino]

wow....I.....I.....I dont know what to say. I didnt know i did that that much. but Mac, all is forgiven, it's for a good cause...i guess.

[NEON MERCURY]

mac, you are the man....!!!
there really needs to be a search engine on the web w/ your name....

btw- el duderino......:

[Banky]

El dudeniro post the same way and dont change your style.  None of the shit you said was to offensive, not that that was the argument but come on man the whole point of a message board is to have a voice even if it is just through text.

[cine]

mac, you are the man....!!!
there really needs to be a search engine on the web w/ your name....

MacGoogle.