[Hitch]

Originally Posted by kindlekitten

I actually watch a lot of PBS and have decided if I don't give about 250 this year, I'm a thief. Still, there is Game of Thrones and so on. One thing about DVR, I pay little attention to the network

SPEAKING of GOT....

There was a thread, that started a while back, about an app that "cleaned up swear words," or something like that, here on MR: https://www.mobileread.com/forums/sho...d.php?t=257688

And I thought it was a doofus idea, natch. But now, I have an app that I want. I am going to call it the TWIT App. Now, TWIT is not the word I want to use, speaking of "coarse language;" but I'm cleaning it up for this forum, and my level of aggro about the whole deal is reflected in the fact that my brain is even thinking about the OTHER (extremely similar) word. And here's my rant:

I'm sick to death of the constant bombardment of my eyeballs with TWITS, used as cheap filler, in shows like GOT. For men, and all those chicks out there who are gay, hooray for you, but I'm sick to death of it. I want the TWIT app, which replaces those "oh-so-important-sex-scenes," in which absolutely NO male parts are EVER displayed (oh, gasp, the horror!), with either a) intelligent plot content, that actually moves the bloody plot FORWARD, or b) BOY BITS.

I'm sick of threads, on various and sundry entertainment fora, in which fans of the constant bombardment of TWIT and cheap faux-soft-porn insist that "oh, but the SEX is crucial to the PLOT," as if a 5-second shot of seeing two folks, naked, under the covers, after the act, wouldn't convey the whole bloody PLOT to us, in the first place. It's a miracle any of us ever managed to see any entertainment, or figure out that characters had sex, prior to the advent of Cinemax. And if the PLOT is so bloody advanced by this constant prurient waste of cellulose, if SEEING the sex act is just so bloody crucial, then: where are the boy bits? What, we can't understand the plots without boobs and TWITS in our faces, but, bygod, we are perfectly capable of understanding it with wedding tackle hidden from our eyes? Is there no double-standard too ridiculous for the entertainment industry? Is the cognitive dissonance--"oh, we must be able to SEE all those nude women to advance the plot, but we don't need BOY BITS for that"--just never-ending?

I am no prude, by ANY means, but it seems that the non-stop titillation (in a single direction, mind you, of COURSE) as cheap (in every sense of the word) filler is just everywhere. It used to be other stupid bits, for film-stretcher (driving scenes...swimming scenes. Getting up and getting dressed scenes, you name it). But now, I have to suffer through what is, any minute now, going to turn into a full-blown gynecological exam, just to find out what Danaerys Targar-whatever will do next.

Warning, GOT spoiler if you haven't seen last year or this:

Spoiler:

(n.b.: I can't abide that character, ever since she locked up her dragons).

...and worse, nobody even seems to NOTICE that they're not getting their hour's worth, or whatever; HBO is simply fleshing it out (yes, I said that) with 15 minutes of prurience that does absolutely NOTHING to give us story, and does absolutely EVERYTHING to try to appeal to a teenage boy. The same thing was true of Spartacus--I actually stopped watching it. I mean, how many times can you watch Lucy Lawless being, uhhh..."stimulated" by her female slave before the ick facter kicks in?

</rant>

Done now. I'm sure I'll be in the minority, but really...it's just crap. I forget which actress it was--a high-ranked one--that put in her movie contracts with studios that she'd do full nudity in any scene in which the man would, too, and somehow, magically, for tons of years, her career not only survived, but thrived. (And, surprise! Nobody ever saw her parts, either.) If people want porn, god knows, there's plenty of it. (Of course, on the so-called 'premium' channels, no boy bits THERE, either!).

I'd just like to see the STORY, without the absurd overdose of cheap film-stretching pseudo-porn, under the guise of an actual, high-production-values show. And, yes: I can (and probably will) turn it off. I don't mind sex, don't mind nudity, but I do mind being inundated with it. If I wanted that, I'd watch Max at Night, or whatever it's called now. And yes: I know that the books (from which GOT is derived) are loaded with sex, thanks.

Hitch