Which is worse for kids and teens: horror movies or rom-coms?

Gerald Barrett25 said:We already know Triumph of the Will was dangerous because it targeted a "mainstream" audience—it clearly showed that. I just can't quite wrap my head around whether that same logic applies to Michael Moore's films... hence 🙄

Look, bias is bias—no matter how you dress it up.

Look, bias is bias. It doesn't matter how you dress it up.

And honestly... it’s a pretty short walk from being a strict formalist to becoming a total nihilist. 😉

And just like Ali G says, Apple is a thin line between Punani and Batty—so don't go taking your wife to the wrong one.

Zeljac said:On one hand you've got anxiety, blood, and dragons—but then there's those lighthearted romances starring Hugh Grant and Meg Ryan.

So, it's either this overly dramatic stuff with Julia Roberts that just leaves you feeling miserable, or those wild, hilarious movies where people basically tear apart characters just like her.

I guess, what do you think makes kids happier?

steelviper6 said:On one hand, you've got this pathetic whining starring Julia Roberts that just leads to mental breakdowns and a totally broken sense of humor. Then, on the other hand, you have these hilariously wild takes on slaughtering pathetic losers like Julia Roberts.

What do you think actually makes kids happier?

🤣

Honestly, whenever I see a totally out-of-it Drew Barrymore in *50 First Dates* (and let's be real, even the title is pretty stupid... 🙄 ), I just pray to God my kids never have to watch stuff like that...

Jeremy Bishop5 said:🤣

Whenever I see Drew Barrymore acting all goofy in *50 First Dates*—which, honestly, is such a silly title, too... 🙄—I just pray to God my kids never have to watch stuff like that...

I mean, someone really needs to shut her up with some burnt toast. It feels like in every single movie she’s either playing this innocent girl who's never even been kissed and is just waiting for some guy to show up, or she's some wild outlaw from the Old West. 🙄

steelviper6 said:... and he can't wait to get laid...

WHAT did I tell you people?!!

slylynx16 said:WHAT did I tell you all?!!

just some nonsense...🙏

romantic comedies are definitely more 'dangerous,' if you ask me.

slylynx16 said:WHAT did I tell you guys?!!

🤣

I guess I'll head down to the local dive bar—maybe see if the ladies there are into that kind of thing! 😁

I agree with the majority (16 out of 19)
The American propaganda machine is seriously numbing the youth and teenagers. It paints a picture of the world that is completely disconnected from reality.
It creates a false perception, sends the wrong messages, and offers terrible advice. It shifts everyone's focus away from what actually matters toward total nonsense.

It just breeds insecurity!

It's garbage!

Catatonic_Beaver said:A "triumph of the will"?

I saw it.

Great movie.

Really well done.

Some people probably won't get it just because there isn't any sex in it.

kozz said:Are we talking about those movies starring Vin Diesel?

Well, that explains why my vocabulary has shrunk down to single syllables.

On topic:
"Dangerous" movies don't actually exist.

Aside from the one mentioned, there are plenty more.
Take something like Mrs. Fahrenheit, for example.
By the way, Mrs. Fahrenheit and Columbians aren't that kind of movie.

There are as many American films like this as you want to find.
Especially from the Cold War era.
I've watched tons of them.
(Even in a certain show in Central Park, there's a parody of this kind of thing)
In the episode with the monster from the woods.

newcomer said:Look, I know this whole thread is just one big joke, so here’s my quick breakdown of how much damage these movies actually do to kids:
-- A Hugh Grant movie where he hooks up with two girls (=) blood down to the knees from a nasty STI, hopefully caught before it spreads.
-- A romantic couple who finally get together five minutes before the credits roll (=) some girl ends up with an infection so bad even a toddler would recognize a brutal period.

Honestly, horror movies are the real threat. Why? Because they teach kids to be afraid of the wrong things. When you're a kid, you think your biggest life threats are guys with knives, Dracula, Freddy Krueger, or zombies... when the real danger is something else entirely.

ris XXXX said:There are more than just that one win.
Take our Lady of Mount Carmel, for example.
PS — Fahrenheit and Columbians aren't even like that.

Yes, they are. Just as much as I'm forcing my opinion on you.

northerncrane4 said:They are. I'm imposing my opinion on you just the same.

Please, don't go trying to force your views on us. 🙄

lepa.pametna@neudata said:Just look at the evidence supporting my point—specifically, those double-digit percentages regarding women who are faking it during sex.

Honestly, why does it even matter? Why should that be an issue for me, or ris XXXX, or anyone else besides them?
🙂

Jason Morgan2 said:Stop trying to force your opinion on us. 🙄

..haha "triumph of the will" is just some rom-com nonsense northerncrane4 uses to pretend we're being told what to think. 😁

Jose Miller17 said:..haha, "triumph of the will" is just some romanticized comedy northerncrane4 uses to claim we're being brainwashed when we aren't. 😁

I guess Moran was incredibly successful at influencing you—since you haven't even realized you're being manipulated. 😎

northerncrane4 said:It’s pretty impressive how Moore managed to brainwash you without you even noticing he was doing it. 😎

Right, because Moore is such a master of subtlety...🙄
Just tell the rest of us which opinion he's supposedly forcing on us. Unless you think he's trying to convince us that we're being manipulated? If that's your logic, then you're doing the exact same thing... except for you, it's painfully obvious. 🤣

Jose Miller17 said:Sure, Moore is a master of subtlety...🙄
but why don't you tell us exactly which opinion he's forcing on us? Unless—and hear me out—you actually believe he's forcing an opinion by making us feel like our own thoughts are being dictated to us. By that logic, you're doing the exact same thing... except it's painfully obvious when you do it.🤣

Oh, please. I’m in no position to force an opinion on anyone—communication with me is a two-way street, meaning my views are open to direct questioning from the "imposer" (should I say oppressor?). Moore's isn't. He simply presents his version of events—deliberately withholding any details that don't fit his narrative—by using a medium that lacks any real dialogue. Clearer now? 😛