Posted by CABJBLK at spider-wm066.proxy.aol.com on August 10, 2000 at 17:07:28:
In Reply to: Pulp Fiction and Casino posted by Alferd Packer on August 10, 2000 at 16:47:00:
The MPAA (or some similar organization) released a report last year when "South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut" was released and it was shown to be the single most profanity-laden film in the history of motion pictures, with the number reaching somewhere over 400 (that number is not exact, just my memory of the report).
All this aside, it doesn't matter how many swears are in a film to determine whether it's "good" or "bad". Just ask David Mamet: one of the greatest films I've seen (adapted from his own play of the same name) was the cuss-filled "Glengarry Glen Ross", but not to be overlooked are Mamet's PG-rated "The Spanish Prisoner" and his G-rated (yes, "G") "The Winslow Boy." Though the guy is reknowed for his FPM rate ("'Fucks' Per Minute"), the bottom line is that the guy writes gripping, intelligent stories.
The same thing can be said for Kev. I'll use his comics as an example: The VA comics give him the freedom to have a high FPM rate, but that obviously won't swing for Marvel (though he was able to throw in a few good "what the hell"s) and DC--and "Daredevil" was still great ! ("Green Arrow" will kick ass!)
Swear words are just like special F/X: you soak as many of them into a film as possible, it doesn't change the fact that the film is shitty. Just look at that piece of dog-shit, "The Matrix" which was nothing but eye-candy, slow contrivances, and another opportunity for Keanu to prove that he's a no-talent retard; as opposed to "eXistenZ" which was a tight story with erotic under-(and over-)tones and rock-solid acting.