Moll Flanders(Alex Kingston) short movie review.
05-26-99, 11:49 PM
#1
Guest
Posts: n/a
I've not seen the DVD of this yet but I've seen it in the stores. This version was, I believe, the MASTERPIECE THEATRE version of the story. It was great!
Kingston is attractive, sexy, and funny and this version was more adult than the one that came out with Robin Wright.
I will pick it up soon.
Kingston is attractive, sexy, and funny and this version was more adult than the one that came out with Robin Wright.
I will pick it up soon.
05-27-99, 11:50 AM
#4
Guest
Posts: n/a
Naked? Excuse me? Now that's something to be interested in... Heh.
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
------------------
~epski
http://www.dvdtracker.com/~epski.asp
Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
------------------
~epski
http://www.dvdtracker.com/~epski.asp
05-27-99, 08:56 PM
#5
Guest
Posts: n/a
Yeah and there's lesbian stuff too...
And YES PBS WILL show full nudity under the label HIGH ART. I mean ANY child could tune in and see the seen where the drunk judge "HAS" Moll in the carriage. It's too bad PBS doesn't think about this before they show it.
I personally don't have a problem with it, but I don't think kids should have access to this.
And YES PBS WILL show full nudity under the label HIGH ART. I mean ANY child could tune in and see the seen where the drunk judge "HAS" Moll in the carriage. It's too bad PBS doesn't think about this before they show it.
I personally don't have a problem with it, but I don't think kids should have access to this.
05-28-99, 10:00 AM
#7
Guest
Posts: n/a
Having no kids to feel protective of, I'm probably not objective. But I have to point out that I looked in the TV guide, and found Moll Flanders playing 9-11 PM last Sunday, 1-3 AM last night, and 10-12 PM tonight.
Add to that the fact that it is PBS, and named "Moll Flanders" (not "Ye Olde Wenche Getting it On") I really don't think it is worth getting worked up.
And of course to chime in about American cultural hangups, you mind if your children see some titty, but not if they see animals tearing each other apart (PBS) or people brutally killing each other (mainstream TV, movies) ?
Add to that the fact that it is PBS, and named "Moll Flanders" (not "Ye Olde Wenche Getting it On") I really don't think it is worth getting worked up.
And of course to chime in about American cultural hangups, you mind if your children see some titty, but not if they see animals tearing each other apart (PBS) or people brutally killing each other (mainstream TV, movies) ?
05-28-99, 10:17 AM
#8
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well...Eli What's your point? MY BLUE HEAVEN just aired here in LA on channel 13!The fact that this show was/is airing right now is why I posted this short review. Like I said I saw it on DVD in the store and having seen the TV airing last year, I thought I would put my 2 cents in.
As far as "getting worked up", well whatever... I happen to think Kingston is gorgeous and this role has her in some very flattering scenes.
Hell!!! Why am I explaining this to you? Bottom line, don't like don't buy. Violence on TV IS NOT against the law if kids view it but graphic sex scenes are and PBS gets away with it saying it is "ART".
As far as "getting worked up", well whatever... I happen to think Kingston is gorgeous and this role has her in some very flattering scenes.
Hell!!! Why am I explaining this to you? Bottom line, don't like don't buy. Violence on TV IS NOT against the law if kids view it but graphic sex scenes are and PBS gets away with it saying it is "ART".
05-28-99, 02:40 PM
#9
Guest
Posts: n/a
Oh heck, Giantrobo, you misunderstand me. My point was aimed at Keb who complained about this show being aired "during prime time on a gov't sponsered television network"
Me, I love nudity, and taped part 2 last night to see if the show is interesting enough to own.
Me, I love nudity, and taped part 2 last night to see if the show is interesting enough to own.
05-28-99, 04:36 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
I have no problem with nudity either. I am an adult with no children, so i don't even have to worry about it much. But, I think that the government paying to broadcast something that clearly violates the morals of a good many people is wrong. If you don't object to children watching nudity and sex on television (rather graphic in Moll Flanders, I might add), then fine, but many people do and why should those people's values be discarded like trash.
I am sick of liberals believing that everyone is entitled to their own opinion in this country, everyone except of course those that support more traditional christian morals. Imagine PBS broadcasting an evangelical baptist church service ... the ACLU would be screaming from the rafters that it violates their rights, but show smut all you want and people with old-fashioned values just have to deal with it.
Show Moll Flanders all day on Cinemax if you want, have a Moll Flanders marathon and show it 24 hours straight, I don't care. I'll probably watch it. But, I don't believe the US government has any business paying to broadcast it. Believe it or not, that boils down to the government attempting to force a value system on the masses, which is WRONG.
[This message has been edited by keb (edited 05-28-99).]
I am sick of liberals believing that everyone is entitled to their own opinion in this country, everyone except of course those that support more traditional christian morals. Imagine PBS broadcasting an evangelical baptist church service ... the ACLU would be screaming from the rafters that it violates their rights, but show smut all you want and people with old-fashioned values just have to deal with it.
Show Moll Flanders all day on Cinemax if you want, have a Moll Flanders marathon and show it 24 hours straight, I don't care. I'll probably watch it. But, I don't believe the US government has any business paying to broadcast it. Believe it or not, that boils down to the government attempting to force a value system on the masses, which is WRONG.
[This message has been edited by keb (edited 05-28-99).]
05-28-99, 05:54 PM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Hmm...If I remember correctly, PBS is also largely paid for by the viewers...isn't that why they have those fund drives begging for money all of the time? I go to a public high school, so the dollars of taxpayers are going to work on buying books for us to read (like "Moll Flanders" and "Tom Jones," which, on A&E, had brief nudity.). If the people are paying for it, I'd assume that many of the people want to see it.
But to stay on topic, I was considering buying the DVD (of the Masterpiece Theatre version of "Moll Flanders," in case you've already forgotten what this was about
). Has anyone seen it and have any comments? I can't find a review of the DVD anywhere.
[Edited because I thought the tone of my original post was confrontational, and I didn't mean for it to come across like that. Deleted a few sentences.]
[This message has been edited by DVDer (edited 05-28-99).]
But to stay on topic, I was considering buying the DVD (of the Masterpiece Theatre version of "Moll Flanders," in case you've already forgotten what this was about
). Has anyone seen it and have any comments? I can't find a review of the DVD anywhere.[Edited because I thought the tone of my original post was confrontational, and I didn't mean for it to come across like that. Deleted a few sentences.]
[This message has been edited by DVDer (edited 05-28-99).]
05-28-99, 09:20 PM
#12
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well DVDer, Yes it IS payed for by the public
BUT THAT is the issue. If I don't want to pay for nude scenes in Moll FLanders with my tax dollars, I have NO choice short of NOT paying taxes. I'm a TAXPAYER because I don't want to go to jail. Anyway, Like ELI said if one is conservative in thier views they are told to shut up and NOT impose conservative values on anyone else BUT liberal values are supposed to be SWALLOWED with no complaint!!
BTW I like seeing Kingston NUDE because I'm no prude. But I respect others right to not have to deal with that.
BUT THAT is the issue. If I don't want to pay for nude scenes in Moll FLanders with my tax dollars, I have NO choice short of NOT paying taxes. I'm a TAXPAYER because I don't want to go to jail. Anyway, Like ELI said if one is conservative in thier views they are told to shut up and NOT impose conservative values on anyone else BUT liberal values are supposed to be SWALLOWED with no complaint!!
BTW I like seeing Kingston NUDE because I'm no prude. But I respect others right to not have to deal with that.
05-28-99, 09:27 PM
#13
Guest
Posts: n/a
Others have the right not to deal with it. It is called changing the channel. I don't like Bill Clinton, but, hey, who pays his salary? Should others be subjected to him? Only if they want to be. Are all Americans subjected to him? Yes.
Where did Eli make the point you wrote about, anyway? I read this point he made:
And of course to chime in about American cultural hangups, you mind if your children see some titty, but not if they see animals tearing each other apart (PBS) or people brutally killing each other (mainstream TV, movies) ?
...and I'd like to second the notion.
Tax dollars are going to pay for things that should worry you much more than "Moll Flanders." (Ever watched the segment "The Fleecing of America" on NBC's Nightly News?)
Anyway, I don't think this is really worth having a huge debate over, because it seems fairly obvious that no opinions are going to be changed. That said, this is my second and last point on the subject, though I'm sure Giantrobo will respond. And I'm sure I'll read the reply eagerly, as it's always interesting to hear varying thoughts on topics such as this.
[Edited bad spelling.]
[This message has been edited by DVDer (edited 05-28-99).]
Where did Eli make the point you wrote about, anyway? I read this point he made:
And of course to chime in about American cultural hangups, you mind if your children see some titty, but not if they see animals tearing each other apart (PBS) or people brutally killing each other (mainstream TV, movies) ?
...and I'd like to second the notion.
Tax dollars are going to pay for things that should worry you much more than "Moll Flanders." (Ever watched the segment "The Fleecing of America" on NBC's Nightly News?)
Anyway, I don't think this is really worth having a huge debate over, because it seems fairly obvious that no opinions are going to be changed. That said, this is my second and last point on the subject, though I'm sure Giantrobo will respond. And I'm sure I'll read the reply eagerly, as it's always interesting to hear varying thoughts on topics such as this.
[Edited bad spelling.]
[This message has been edited by DVDer (edited 05-28-99).]
05-29-99, 12:57 AM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
Actually you're right DVDer it was not Eli but Keb who made the point.
But just changing the channel doesn't allow someone who is offended by Moll Flanders to "opt out" of paying through their taxes.
Example: I take $20 dollars from you through dues you owe me(taxes)and use it to buy ammo to go hunting. YOU may not care for hunting, but even though you DIDN'T go hunting with me you STILL payed for it with no say in how I spent your $20. In essence you STILL participated in the act of hunting.
I agree BTW that this is not going to change anyone but it needs to be said.
Peace, Enjoyed our chat
But just changing the channel doesn't allow someone who is offended by Moll Flanders to "opt out" of paying through their taxes.
Example: I take $20 dollars from you through dues you owe me(taxes)and use it to buy ammo to go hunting. YOU may not care for hunting, but even though you DIDN'T go hunting with me you STILL payed for it with no say in how I spent your $20. In essence you STILL participated in the act of hunting.
I agree BTW that this is not going to change anyone but it needs to be said.
Peace, Enjoyed our chat
05-29-99, 10:24 AM
#15
Guest
Posts: n/a
I went to PBS online and found their financial report. There it says that almost all of their funding comes from member stations and viewers, as well as the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (if you visit their financial report, you'll see that the US government donates less than everyone else). The only US Department that is listed as giving them money is the Department of Education Grants, which gave them slightly over $40,000 last year.
(If anyone complains about a few fractions of a tenth of a penny of their taxes going to pay for that--or whatever the actual amount would be-- I think they have an unusually high amount of stress in their lives.)
(If anyone complains about a few fractions of a tenth of a penny of their taxes going to pay for that--or whatever the actual amount would be-- I think they have an unusually high amount of stress in their lives.)
