#or the True Cinema comedy | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

hotvintagepoll · 19 days

Text

Propaganda

Madhabi Mukherjee (Charulata, The Big City, The Coward)—Madhabi Mukherjee is legendary for her nuanced and sensitive performances in some of the classics of Bengali cinema particularly her roles in Satyajit Ray's films

Angela Lansbury (The Harvey Girls, The Court Jester, The Manchurian Candidate)—The babe, the myth, the legend. In her own words her early hollywood roles were "a series of venal bitches" and they were all glorious. Half of them wanted to kill you and you probably would have thanked them. She even goes toe to toe with Judy Garland in The Harvey Girls! That said, she was chronically underused and misused during this era - she was just 36 when she was cast as Elvis Presley's mother in Blue Hawaii and a few years later commented that she'd played so many 'old hags' that most people thought she was in her 60s. She thought she was "all talent, no looks" but she was the full package! Post-1970 I hope we all know what an incredibly talented and compassionate badass she was, but I feel like not enough people know her early roles as a hot (often villainous) young thing.

This is round 3 of the tournament. All other polls in this bracket can be found here. Please reblog with further support of your beloved hot sexy vintage woman.

[additional propaganda submitted under the cut.]

Madhabi Mukherjee:

She played in some of the most critically acclaimed films in bengali cinema and she is an incredibly talented actress. Everybody should watch 'The Big City' she's so good in it!

Linked clip

Gifset 1

Gifset 2

Angela Lansbury:

"Angela Lansbury might not be where your mind goes first when you think of hot leading women, because she had a later career revival. But she began acting in the early 1940s after leaving London due to the Blitz. In the first couple decades of her film career she has an openness about her. She said she never really fit in with the Hollywood crowd and to me she gives off a friendly, untarnished vibe."

"Most of us know Angela Lansbury as old lady sleuth Jessica Fletcher, but it's important to know that she was smoking hot in her younger days as well as a damned fine actress. Although she didn't get lead roles until her early 40s, at 17 she was a supporting actress in films such as Gaslight (1944), National Velvet (1944), and The Picture of Dorian Grey, for which she won the Golden Globe for best supporting actress and was nominated for the Oscar. Even in her memorable performance as the manipulative mother in The Manchurian Candidate, she is listed as a supporting actress as she does not play the love interest. She was successful both on stage and screen, and won the Tony for her lead role in the musical Mame on Broadway in 1966. TL;DR While Angela Lansbury mostly played supporting roles in films before 1970, she had what it takes to be a leading actress, which we know from her success on stage and tv from the mid 60s onward"

"She looked like a princess but bit like a viper"

"Is there anything this woman couldn't do? Act in comedy and drama, sing, dance, be a wonderful human being - quite simply a true and wonderful lady."

"she is the fairytale princess of my dreams in court jester"

"god she had such an incredible career all throughout her life really but as a young lady she was just as incredible as she was in her later years. enchanting voice, amazing personality, and absolutely GORGEOUS. she lamented not having the looks to play leads in romance but that idea is so batshit because look at her??? she's one of the most terrific women of all time. also she's my grandmother's favorite actress and i truly get it"

#angela lansbury #madhabi mukherjee #hotvintagepoll #fuck that old woman #ladies 3

217 notes · View notes

brainbuffering · 1 year

Text

An argument that regularly occurs within the discussion of accessibility in cinema, is that creators should not have limitations put upon them. If their creative vision requires Strobe effects to be used, then they should be used regardless of any adverse effects they may have on the viewer.

Others before me have spoken about how the health and wellbeing of your audience should be more important than any artistic vision. However, I think something that is never noted is that creatives are already placed with strict limitations in the form of age certificate guidelines, and other broadcasting standards.

Now, fair warning. I am going to use a lot of uncensored profanity here. If you are offended by slang terms that refer to the act of sex, genitalia, a person's moral/social standing, or any form of bodily fluid then you may wish to step away.

"Cunt. Cunt cunt cunt cunt. Cuntity-cunt-cunt! I'll say it again you shit faced bastards! What is up with all these mother fucking cunts, on this mother fucking cunt ass plane?" is a phrase that beloved merc-with-a-mouth Deadpool is not allowed to say. The rating of the series doesn't matter. The nature of the character doesn't matter. The fact that, objectively, nothing of true offence to any individual beyond the realm of fiction has been said; doesn't matter. The words used are deemed as offensive by the society in which we live in, and so the producers and editors have decided to place limitations on the writers.

British Swear-tastic Political Comedy "The Thick of It" famously had to carefully count the number of cunts and fucks in order to meet with "broadcasting standards". This limited their actors ability to improvise more effectively, and led to scenes being forced to be cut or heavily edited in post production. Yet nobody ever questions whether the limit on swearing was unreasonable even though it was fundamentally detrimental to their creative process.

These may seem like some extreme examples, but one must remember that this applies to all cinematic media. It does not matter that a depressed, middle aged Peter Parker would be perfectly at home letting our a quite "Ahhhh fuck." when he drops his pizza on the floor, because Spider-Man films need to be rated PG-13 in order to maintain sales. This policing of language does limit the ways in which a character is allowed to express themselves, and the sort of stories that are therefore allowed to be told. However the majority of fans deem it perfectly reasonable and acceptable. It does not cause outrage in the same way that suggesting a PG-13 film does not contain Strobe effects heavy enough to send someone to hospital. It would appear that society has deemed the word “Fuck” worse than a Seizure. Peter Parker cannot say fuck in order to protect viewers, he can, however, bombard them with deadly strobes.

And why is this? What is it about our society where we have deemed it more traumatising for a 14 year old to hear the word "cunt" than it is for them to have (or even witness) a seizure? I can assure you, from personal experience, that seizures have caused far more long term damage to my brain than the word "cunt" ever has.

Cinematic Limitations are not just put down to language though. Blood shed is also something that is carefully monitored during ratings. If one watches the extended edition of "The Hobbit: The Battle of the Five Armies" one will note significantly more blood shed during the extended sequences! A level that is far more realistic than what was shown in the original. This is because the cinematic release needed to be a 12a, whereas the Extended BluRay was allowed to be a 15. The creators had to work around creative limitations that were put in place to protect their viewers' sensibilities.

Of course standards for these things differ across nations. Other recent examples of this include films such as "Demon Slayer: Mugan Train". Demon Slayer is a Japanese animated film based off of a comic aimed at young boys, and as such was given a PG12 rating in its home nation. However, in the UK it was rated as 15 due to "Strong Violence" including "strangling, slashings and stabbings with bladed weapons, dismemberment and decapitations which result in extensive blood spurts and other forms of bloodshed." The US release was given an R Rating for similar reasons, although it is perhaps important to note that whilst in the UK the film was not allowed to be seen by anyone under the age of 15, in the US a child could still go see the film so long as they had adult supervision.

Yet it is also interesting to note that whilst Japanese Society considers fantasy levels of blood shed to not be a problem for their children to watch, they do have some of the strictest photosensitivity laws for broadcast TV. This is as a direct response to the infamous "Pokémon Incident" where 685 children from across Japan were taken to hospital after suffering from seizures following an episode of the Pokémon anime in 1997. “Electric Soldier Porygon” has hence been banned from ever being broadcast again, and the titular Porygon has never been seen in the anime since. Even though the trigger for the seizures was Pikachu’s attacks, not Porygon’s. #PorygonWasInnocent.

Most fans consider this a reasonable response to children being put in danger by a TV Show! Indeed, when people watch the episode on YouTube (some things simply refuse to stay lost) folks tend to agree that the lighting effects were incredibly severe and TV Tokyo were right to ban the episode. Yet in 2018 (over a decade after Electric Soldier Porygon Aired) when Pixar also caused children to have seizures in the cinema during "The Incredibles 2" the film was not pulled from screenings or revised, and anyone who suggested it should be was met with volatile abuse from so-called-fans claiming that if their creative vision involved strobe effects, then those strobe effects should be allowed to stay in, no matter how many children might be hurt in the process!

Interesting to note, too, is that the version of the film that aired in the USA was in actual fact illegal to broadcast in the UK due to the potentially deadly nature of the strobe effects, and so an altered version had to be shown. This version still came with an official warning (as is legally required in the UK) but was at least deemed not as likely to cause seizures in those who do not usually suffer from photosensitive seizures. What this tells us, is that Pixar had a version of the film that they could have easily re-distributed to theatres but chose not to.

Pixar easily accepted limitations on their films in terms of language and violence in order to protect the moral/mental well-being of their audience, but drew the line at anything that would actually protect their physical well-being.

You may find yourself reading this and agreeing with the certificate ratings. You may think that the words such as "shit", "fuck", and "cunt" shouldn't be used in media aimed at under 15s. That an excessive or realistic depiction of blood and violence has no place in superhero films that are naturally going to appeal to children! And yet, in my experience, the same people who have these views do not expand them to the use of strobes. Any time the mention of films such as “Into The Spider-verse” should not include strobe effects, a plethora of people will rise up to tell you that you are wrong and terrible and bad for daring to suggest such limitations be put upon cinema! Yet as demonstrated above, these films must already undergo limitations in order to be shown to mass audiences. If the creators wanted total creative freedom, they would keep themselves to small indie productions supported by Kickstarter. Yet when a film is made for a mass market, then it must accept those mass market limitations, especially if they wish for their film to be watched by a younger audience.

Because, at the end of the day, whilst I may be forced to hear again and again that not all animation is for children, a coming of age movie about a teenager attending a brand new high school is, fundamentally, going to be aimed at people under the age of 18. A.K.A. Children. It is also important to note, that the age in which a person is most likely to experience their first seizure is between the ages of 13 and 18, the exact age range that these films are deemed safe for in terms of emotional and mental wellbeing.

Now, I am no parent, but if given the choice between my child hearing Peter Parker call Green Goblin a "Little Shit", or having to hold my child's limp hand as I desperately prayed for them to wake up after suffering from a seizure, I know which I would rather.

I’m not calling for a complete rehaul of cinema certification here. I’m not advocating for more swearing, or more bloodshed. I simply believe that if certificate ratings exist to provide guidance to parents and the rest of the general public about what to expect from films, and what society decides is and is not safe for children to consume, then their physical as well as mental health should be taken into consideration.

And if you are reading this, and still find that a production company including the word "cunt" in their film is more offensive than that film causing someone to have a Seizure, then I have terrible news for you. I think you might be just a tad bit ableist. And that maybe, you, and vast portions of the western film industry, need to start addressing that problem. Before it becomes too late, and the voices of photosensitive people are lost to cinema forever.

For, at the end of the day, if we cannot go see these films, how can we be inspired by them?

#actually epileptic #actually disabled #spider-man #into the spiderverse #incredibles #incredibles 2 #film #cinema #blog post #cw swearing

2K notes · View notes