Bullets 'n' Babes

Teaser trailers up.

I've been waiting so long for this to come out. Shaun of the Dead was simply awesome.

Shaun of the Dead meets A Better Tomorrow , it's even funnier when you remember cops don't have guns here (except special units).

This does look rather cool indeed
I liked the little nod to Shaun in the bargain basket. 8)

Bet you guys haven't seen this yet. Well I have and thought it was really funny.

I've noticed you see films early, do you download them? Some of us prefer to wait to see it properly

Actually I do watch them properly. I have a cinema pass so I use that.

I saw it at the cinema on Thursday. I didn't find it laugh-out-loud funny, but I thought the action scenes were crazy.

I just listened to these guys on the Kermode's film session via podcast. They seem really nice guys, especially Edgar Wright. I'm inclined to see Hot Fuzz now, I wasn't that bothered before.

I read an interview in Empire in which they made a nasty joke about Cynthia Rothrock having AIDS. Not so nice?

Markgway wrote:I read an interview in Empire in which they made a nasty joke about Cynthia Rothrock having AIDS. Not so nice?

OHNOES, someone made an un-PC joke! Call the leftard police!

I've no idea I didn't read it, it was probably taken out of context and Cynthia Rothrock who? (I know who she is).

To claim someone has AIDS isn't funny and Empire shouldn't have printed it.

I suppose Eva would find it funny if we all made jokes about his family having AIDS.

Rothrock has been in a few HK films AFAIK, wasn't she in Yes Madam/Police Assassins?

I agree Mark that doesn't sound funny

Yes she was Grim.

Like I said I'm not going to judge someone one third party information when I don't even know what he said.

Markgway wrote:To claim someone has AIDS isn't funny and Empire shouldn't have printed it.

So it's okay to censor Empire but wrong to censor James Bond (for example)? O-Kay!

If he said it, they definitely should've printed it. I thought you were against censorship? I guess not.

bradavon wrote:So it's okay to censor Empire but wrong to censor James Bond (for example)? O-Kay! If he said it, they definitely should've printed it. I thought you were against censorship? I guess not.

Umm... it would be self-censorship. Empire could have used good judgement not to print the quote without anyone forcing them to. You think they print everything an interviewee says all the time? To be fair Empire did clarify afterwards that it wasn't true but that kind of comment is still tasteless and hurtful. I mean, are we really still using AIDS as an insult in these enlightened times?

Just to re-iterate, you're advocating self-censorship on the grounds that it was tasteless and hurtful? I seem to remember a brouahaha last year about some cartoons...

Kurgan wrote:Just to re-iterate, you're advocating self-censorship on the grounds that it was tasteless and hurtful? I seem to remember a brouahaha last year about some cartoons...

Yeah, which made a worthy satirical point.

A poor comparison.

That's what I wanted to hear (or read, rather) for confirmation about my 'poor comparison'.

You are passing judgement on what other people should find acceptable and what they shouldn't. To you, those cartoons were satirical. To others, they were offensive (I found the satirical element to be piss-poor, but that's an aside). You found the AIDS joke offensive or in bad taste, others may have found it funny.
To paraphrase you, why didn't the publishers of the cartoons use good judgement and not print them? They knew someone somewhere was going to be offended.

You can't have it both ways...

And, in case anyone is wondering, I had no problems with the cartoons being printed. That they were piss-poor in the point they were making is my opinion. Nor do I have a problem with the AIDS joke being printed. That it is tasteless is my opinion.

Where's the satire and/or humour in saying a complete stranger has AIDS - a terrible disease which affects millions either directly or indirectly. How can that be funny? You'd expect better from kids in a playground, honestly.

Those Danish cartoons - like them or not - did have a point. To disagree with the point is fair enough but their sole purpose wasn't just to upset millions of people. That's a big difference in my book. It's unfortunate that a proportion of Muslims reacted the way they did instead of debating the serious argument within regarding terrorists using their religion as cover for atrocity.