Lack of nudity seems to be regarded by God as a clear sign of a bad movie, not so much in a movie where the main character appears to be slutty, as it would just be regarded as mildly disappointing, but in particular in movies where the main lead is hot, yet sensible, and "wouldn't normally do that kind of thing". When it's proven that he/she doesn't actually do that kind of thing, the sense of disappointment and frustration can be intense, or at least enough for pissed-of theologists to negatively interpret the film. Funny animals are a paradox; although they can increase the suckiness of most movies, the level of lack of nudity increases (funny animals typically appear in such movies) and thusly the level of suckiness from funny animals ceases to become a primary factor: the negative eff
| Attributes | Values |
|---|
| rdfs:label
| - Worst 100 Movies of All Time
|
| rdfs:comment
| - Lack of nudity seems to be regarded by God as a clear sign of a bad movie, not so much in a movie where the main character appears to be slutty, as it would just be regarded as mildly disappointing, but in particular in movies where the main lead is hot, yet sensible, and "wouldn't normally do that kind of thing". When it's proven that he/she doesn't actually do that kind of thing, the sense of disappointment and frustration can be intense, or at least enough for pissed-of theologists to negatively interpret the film. Funny animals are a paradox; although they can increase the suckiness of most movies, the level of lack of nudity increases (funny animals typically appear in such movies) and thusly the level of suckiness from funny animals ceases to become a primary factor: the negative eff
|
| dcterms:subject
| |
| dbkwik:uncyclopedi...iPageUsesTemplate
| |
| abstract
| - Lack of nudity seems to be regarded by God as a clear sign of a bad movie, not so much in a movie where the main character appears to be slutty, as it would just be regarded as mildly disappointing, but in particular in movies where the main lead is hot, yet sensible, and "wouldn't normally do that kind of thing". When it's proven that he/she doesn't actually do that kind of thing, the sense of disappointment and frustration can be intense, or at least enough for pissed-of theologists to negatively interpret the film. Funny animals are a paradox; although they can increase the suckiness of most movies, the level of lack of nudity increases (funny animals typically appear in such movies) and thusly the level of suckiness from funny animals ceases to become a primary factor: the negative effects from this become negated themselves. Also, any film in which Rutger Hauer or Clint Eastwood appears does not suck. Period.
|
| is Known
of | |
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)