Thursday, July 05, 2007

Rated what?!? MOTHERF*CKER!!!

Online Dating
So I was at one of my favorite sites hollywood elsewhere and saw a post about a blog rater. I love movie ratings - I love how they serve absolutely no purpose except to allow close minded control freaks to know when boobies show up in what films - I love how ratings tell viewers what they can and cannot watch... love the whole thing really.

With this in mind, the concept that my blog or any blog could get a rating, and thusly tell the viewer/reader what they were getting into it, made me chuckle with excitement. So I took a swing and typed in the ol' URL for our beloved damfinoblog in this site.

After all of our filth... after all of the questionable discussions... WE GOT A G RATING!!!! A F*CKING G!!!

Unacceptable. Well, actually, I tend to add "*" and whatnot to the language posted... but that is because some of our readers (among the 4 that we have) read at work - not that it really saves them. Anyway, it just kind of shocked me that the site got a BAMBI like rating.

Free Online Dating
Of course, we can always count on filth-monger elitists like Kern to achieve his goal. Getting some Paul Verhoven SHOWGIRLS love... the discerning Kern ran away with a NC-17.

I guess I need to include more c*cks and dropping deuces on the hind quarters of questionable females - and a little less dorky readings of canceled CW shows.



Kern said...

It's a honor to have garnered such a filthy rating. I wonder if there's some kind of line of code that allows you to keep your blog rating up permanently?

It's like a really f-ed up badge of honor!

But in all seriousness, I must say that I agree with Jed that in general the MPAA's rating system is a joke. I thought it couldn't get any worse, but then they started writing in small boxes all of the elements that got the movie the rating in the first place. I mean, for goodness sake, let it be a surprise! I like going into a movie not knowing exactly whether it's an R because of graphic violence, nudity, or excessive drug use. Stupid self-policing entities always having to ruin our fun...(kicks pebbles dejectedly)

Damfino said...

Thanks Kern - although, I have to admit, part of the reason I am skipping LIVE FREE OR DIE HARD is because it is PG-13 and not R rated.

That is probably a little hypocritical on my part... but what else is new.

Sheriff Officer Greg the Bunny said...

"Tonight on the 'Q' show we hear thejazz stylings of Chalie Mingus, Norman Mailer will read from his new book and a woman from Omaha will hide a banana...whe'll tell you where later."

c'mon man NC-17 or bust!


Kern said...

I think NC-17 in the old days would have been easily doable on the old Damfinoblog.

Jed-I totally know what you mean about the PG-13 Die Hard. I think more than anything I don't want to see it because it looks like it further devolves the everyman action hero persona that McClane represented into just another wisecracking nigh superhuman without the general tension of the original. I think the reason I loved the first one so much was because of the claustrophobic aspect. Tension runs a lot higher when you're stuck with nowhere to go.

That being said, PG-13 bugs me a lot in the sense that it's become de rigeur to shoot just low with meutered action/language/violence in order to sell more tickets, further siding more with the business side of filmmaking rather than turning out a quality piece of art and/or entertainment.

krysta jo said...

I don't care what the rating is - if the movie is good - it's good.

Die Hard was amazing. I loved it. I have never seen a Die Hard movie in my life and I drug Dan to it. Really great. He loved it too and said it was better than the first three. However, we aren't quite the movie buffs and critics that many of the Damfino clan are. Surely you will disagree.

Kern said...

The reason I'm going to wait until cable is not because of the rating, but because I think having watched all the Die Hard movies from a young age, I kind of have certain thoughts about what a Die Hard movie is. I thought the third one was fun, but it seemed with every sequel McClane began devolving further and further into caricature of his original character. It just seemed more fun when things were a little more grounded, relatively speaking. Obviously it's not the paragon of reality to have him blowing up elevator shafts in the original either, but still.

I think if you like the new one, definitely go back and see the first one. It's awesome and I think it holds up really, really well!