|
Post by wifeofsmartass on May 6, 2009 21:30:05 GMT -5
Don't get me wrong, it's just that I saw Animal Farm when I was a bitty kid. I think I was one of the few kids to 'get' what it was about. It's just kind of gruesome to let a kid watch. (My parents let me watch blood and guts horror movies when I was little. ) I appreciate those kinds of things for giving people a bit of a smack and making them realize that not all cartoons are great for kids and they don't -have- to be. Yeah, I too was one of those kids who watched blood and guts films at a young age. lol And yes, I agree with how cartoons don't have to always be child-friendly.
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 7, 2009 0:04:26 GMT -5
In my opinion, blood and guts horror is just plain gross. There's no subtlety. After all, I think a human being is more shocked and disturbed by that sort of thing rather than genuinely frightened. My personal limit is stabbing, bleeding, decapitation, and dismemberment. Maybe crushed bones. But no vitals organs for me...
I base my noodlings in horror more on primitive feelings and situations, since fear is a primitive feeling in the first place. Fear of the unknown, fear of what one doesn't understand, fear of what we know is impossible, fear of the dark... fear is more of an anticipation than a reaction. Most horror movies nowadays are based on knee-jerk reactions- they scream in your face with bloody flesh flying everywhere, making a racket and jumping up and down... it's as sophisticated as sneaking up behind someone and saying "Boo!"
The two horror movies that have genuinely scared me are 1961's The Haunting and Poltergeist. I like my horror movies to either be quiet and subdued, or chaotic like The Haunted Mansion.
Yeah, so... that's probably something you'd see in my art.
|
|
|
Post by wifeofsmartass on May 7, 2009 1:27:44 GMT -5
I agree that gore for the sake of gore is rediculous. But, when a violent situation arises, I'll do extreme gore in my stuff, mainly for realism, since historical periods are a huge part of my medium. If somebody in my story is shot in the head, i don't shy away from drawing brain splatter. I dunno, to me realistic gore is scarey, since i know that it's possible for myself to get mangled in a car wreck, for example. >_< Ghosts fascinate me big time! But they don't scare me. They used to, but not anymore cuz i'm so used to living in a ghost-riddled house my whole life. (I don't mind if anybody calls me crazy, lol i know what i've seen, hence it doesn't bother me ;D ) But since spirits are one of my big interests, i like to add in supernatural elements that relate to the departed, a major theme in a lotta my art. ^^
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 7, 2009 3:00:14 GMT -5
I don't usually have much use for that sort of violence, though... it's very rare that I feel it to be appropriate to the story.
|
|
kishi
Experienced member
Posts: 345
|
Post by kishi on May 7, 2009 5:21:55 GMT -5
I don't really like blood and guts either. I actually dislike horror movies in general. Mine have to have some kind of intellectual thing...the closest I get to horror movies is "The Silence of the Lambs", "Hannibal" and "Red Dragon". All of those are rated more as suspense than horror. I do kind of like "Hellraiser" though. The cenobites (the 'bad' guys with the chains and all) make much better sense if you read the book the first movie is based on. (It's called "The Hellbound Heart" by Clive Barker) In the book the cenobites aren't just randomly evil like they seem to be in the movies. You'll note in the first movie, they actually let the people who -didn't- open the box go. Later on it's all just cheap slasher movies where everyone gets killed regardless.
|
|
|
Post by wifeofsmartass on May 7, 2009 21:31:50 GMT -5
Yeah, slasher films that are just used to shock people aren't my cup of tea. Like I said, I like historical reality; like how artists in the 18th century would dissect human bodies to study, as an example. And medieval torture devices, which were used long after the medieval days were gone, are so extremely brutal and twisted, and some certainly resulted in the exposure of entrails, but that's total reality. To me horror is things that have happened, or could really happen. But that's my opinion. I think guts can be totally appropriate some stories, unless no human being on the face of this earth has never had a violent end. Truth is the truth. I've had family members (whom I never met) that have died very brutally. So we all have our own categories of what we consider horror to be in. I also think that what we consider to be horror depends on our background. Some people are afraid of ghost stories, and others are not, for example. The things that get to me in a story or movie are the fearful things in life that have happened to me that I can relate to in the story.
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 11, 2009 12:48:57 GMT -5
Truth and reality is subjective- we choose what we want to see and believe in the world. I for one, fail to see what's realistic about violence for realism's sake, when violence is only a small part of reality. I personally think it's a sad mistake when one deems it necessary to include violence in order for something to be "realistic". That really should depend on what sort of story it is. If it's about a middle-class suburban family struggling to raise their kid, what reason is there for violence when it's the child raising that creates the conflict in the first place? Because I don't have much of a taste for violence- it's simply a matter of taste, mind you- I prefer to use action instead of violence, because it involves grace and skill and doesn't require much more than a little blood. I'm more inspired by classic Hollywood films rather than any of those gritty dramas where everyone is miserable. Besides, they say write what you know- and I hardly know anything about how one gets their entrails ripped out. I'm not interested...
|
|
kishi
Experienced member
Posts: 345
|
Post by kishi on May 11, 2009 20:06:32 GMT -5
Ick. I don't include violence for 'realism', unless it actually and naturally occurs in the story I'm writing. o.O Which is to say, there isn't really a way to avoid it happening. In the case of the weasels, they're gangsters and tend to get into gunfights/streetfights, so sometimes they'd get hurt. You don't go out and get shot at without getting hurt somehow, even if you are a toon. Of course they don't die, just get kinda irritated. It hurts, but it's like...I dunno...stubbing your toe. You feel it, it hurts, and after a while it stops. (At least for a Toon.) I have an ongoing rewrite of a TaleSpin story of mine revolving around the air pirates. I think it's the most violent thing I've ever written. XD They've gotten shot at, chased, and there was a air/gunfight that culminated with someone getting killed. I don't get too graphically gory with that though. :\ I don't think anyone really needs to have it described in such detail.
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 11, 2009 20:24:40 GMT -5
Glad you agree. Most toons who get shot either have their faces blackened, or become full of holes like Swiss cheese... XP
|
|
kishi
Experienced member
Posts: 345
|
Post by kishi on May 12, 2009 5:16:42 GMT -5
I know. I have part of a Toon patrol story written out in my head where at one point Wheezy gets shot, falls down, freaks a couple of people out, then jumps up and yells "D***! That stings!" and runs off. XD The Swiss Cheese thing happened to Psycho in the graphic novel version of the movie story. And he freaking -giggled- about it. *laughs* I can't get past the image of him with swiss cheese holes and giggling.
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 12, 2009 12:32:46 GMT -5
Yeah, I have a copy of that one. I get the impression that he's semi-oblivious to it, sort of like before he falls into the Dip machine brushes. It could be an automatic reaction, rather a response to him finding it amusing. I notice the most common toon reaction to being shot is having their faces burnt and warped a bit. Sometimes, like Daffy, they'd just get their faces misshapen in a humorous fashion.
I like your idea for Wheezy there. Sort of bordering on the dramatic form of toon injury... I myself have a story in which a toon- one that isn't necessarily meant to be funny- get shot in the stomach and get a big hole, but needs to go to the hospital.
|
|
|
Post by wifeofsmartass on May 12, 2009 21:49:08 GMT -5
Truth and reality is subjective- we choose what we want to see and believe in the world. I for one, fail to see what's realistic about violence for realism's sake, when violence is only a small part of reality. I personally think it's a sad mistake when one deems it necessary to include violence in order for something to be "realistic". That really should depend on what sort of story it is. If it's about a middle-class suburban family struggling to raise their kid, what reason is there for violence when it's the child raising that creates the conflict in the first place? Because I don't have much of a taste for violence- it's simply a matter of taste, mind you- I prefer to use action instead of violence, because it involves grace and skill and doesn't require much more than a little blood. I'm more inspired by classic Hollywood films rather than any of those gritty dramas where everyone is miserable. Besides, they say write what you know- and I hardly know anything about how one gets their entrails ripped out. I'm not interested... Of course it's a matter of taste; I never said something has to be brutal. Like kishi mentioned, it depends on the story. I think we all can agree that each person has their own taste and can respect each other for that. ^_^ Shindler's list is a brutal story, and although it's very draining and sad, I think it's an amazing piece of work, but i like stuff like that cause, I dunno, to me it's an eye-opener and it makes me appreciate life more. And yes; that's what i do- I write what I know. I've seen a lot of things starting at a young age, so the brutal stuff i write about is based after my experiences. I can't help that I've been through what I have. But anyways, yeah, I think it's pretty funny when toons end up like swiss cheese. XD I also think it's interesting how in the Who Censored Roger Rabbit book, a plain old bullet will kill a toon like a human.
|
|
kishi
Experienced member
Posts: 345
|
Post by kishi on May 13, 2009 5:01:09 GMT -5
I've never read the book. :\ I have read another short Roger Rabbit story (it's on the authors website for free) and it was more annoying to me than anything else. XD So now I'm not really sure I want to track down the original novel because from what I understand the movie only loosely resembles it. (I tend to just follow along with the "Disney" version of things.)
Oh...are there weasels in the book?
|
|
|
Post by Fatal hilarity on May 13, 2009 5:20:34 GMT -5
Good grief! I've never heard of that story! Well, I guess I'll read it, then... I know he did a sequel called Who P-P-P-Plugged Roger Rabbit?, but it's kind of... off, for lack of a better word. And from what I'm told of the original book, he's not really that good an author. My brother's read the original book, and he hasn't mentioned any weasels, and if there were, he would've told me- so no, there aren't any. For those who are interested, here's the story: mysite.verizon.net/garykwolf/Staytoonedfolks/Staytoonedfolks.pdf
|
|
kishi
Experienced member
Posts: 345
|
Post by kishi on May 13, 2009 18:58:50 GMT -5
Ah, I was wondering if he was just having a 'off' story or if it really wasn't -that- great.
No offense meant, just...you know, some people are Rembrandt and some people are Chuck Jones and some people draw little stick men on the backs of their homework assignments. It's all good, just some people don't like stick men. XD
I'm not going to go to any huge great lengths to get that book then. If I happen to find it cheap, great. If not, oh well, I have the movie. (Which I just have a gut feeling I'd like better than the book.)
|
|