CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Peter POrn
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Peter POrn

post #1 of 13
9/20/06 at 1:45pm
Thread Starter 
http://chud.com/news/7666
Reply
post #2 of 13
9/20/06 at 2:13pm
Sounds similar to what Freeway did with Little Red Riding Hood, but I doubt this will be as entertaining.
Reply
post #3 of 13
9/20/06 at 2:22pm
I wonder if this will be banned in the U.S. too. That should be Clark's new M.O.
Reply
post #4 of 13
9/20/06 at 2:31pm
Of course, it won't get a UK release until that copyright expires.
Reply
post #5 of 13
9/20/06 at 3:16pm
This was bound to happen, a big name attempting to make a "quality" porn. (Actually, I'm sure it probably has been done, but was brushed off as regular porn) I kind of wish they hadn't gone for such a gimmicky premise, but I guess drawing on the mainstream could really help achieve the relative legitimacy they're looking for.

Still, good to see a prestige project from Moore in a time when I thought one of writing's most versatile artists had begun to resign to digging up his old tricks.
Reply
post #6 of 13
9/20/06 at 5:23pm
That really, really does sound like Clark was reading Lost Girls.
Reply
post #7 of 13
9/20/06 at 8:02pm
Sounds a little like this "chore-to-watch" indie film w/ Wil Wheaton: Neverland
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0349880/

It didn't have porn though...
Reply
post #8 of 13
9/22/06 at 1:07am
Ah, but Mickey Rourke as Hook? Will he bring his chihuahua? I mean, that sounds like fun on it's own- I'd see a solo Hook movie if Rourke was in it.
Reply
post #9 of 13
9/23/06 at 12:56pm
i cannot express how much of a hack i think clark is. although its vision had merit, Kids is the only thing clark's done to date that's come close to being legitimate art. Mean Creek was Bully done right, and the less said about Teenage Cavemen the better. in most cases it's not enough just to have a grasp of the aesthetic value of film. clark's movies aren't boring to watch, but his perverted fixations are always far too prevelant, serving as detriments to the piece rather than benefits to it. it's a waste of apparent talent on clark's end, as well as the filmwatcher's time.

clark was the one who needed to retire from the movies rather than besson.
Reply
post #10 of 13
9/23/06 at 1:00pm
and one more thing: larry clark's no alan moore. if this movie gets made, i can pretty much guarantee that the sub-freud aspects will be the only thing on the screen parading as substance
Reply
post #11 of 13
9/23/06 at 1:01pm
My god, how true that is.

Not just retire, but maybe a few Polanski-like questions need to be asked as well. The dude creeps me out in his single-mindedness. Kids was a strong film/statement that needed to be made. Although Clark was lucky with time and place, it had strong merits.

Each subsequent film the dude makes pales further in comparison.

Besides...Bessons coming back, isnt he?
Reply
post #12 of 13
9/23/06 at 11:51pm
one can only hope. true, besson's strengths were his writing and producing, but he's still very capable of dishing out some worthy directorial work. i'll miss it
Reply
post #13 of 13
9/24/06 at 4:36pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by fabfunk
Ah, but Mickey Rourke as Hook? Will he bring his chihuahua? I mean, that sounds like fun on it's own- I'd see a solo Hook movie if Rourke was in it.
Rourke's dog actually gets top billing in a new "Cody Banks" type kids movie. My head did a quadruple take which resulted in a bloody nose.

But on a more important note, will this movie have a crotch cam in the lower corner of the screen?
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: CHUD.COM Main
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › CHUD.COM Main › Peter POrn