|
Post by skinz on Jul 9, 2005 23:39:03 GMT -5
I have to vent here.
I understand the magnitude of the situation and all but I have a problem with that scene. Was there a need to show all that blood? I, frankly, had enough of television and movies using devices like that excessively to illustrate a point. It's the same tactics used in Passion of the Christ. Showing all that violence to manipulate emotions and for entertainment purposes is just wrong. I hardly think that if the directors or producers witness a true torture they would be calm filming it. I don't have a problem with the scene, its the amount of force was put into it to elevate the character above everyone else.
P.S. To those that know what I'm talking about please respond carefully to not spoil anything. That's why I had to make my statement sound general. I'm sure a lot of people are getting tired of all these spoilers I might bring up.
|
|
|
Post by donilpark on Jul 10, 2005 0:06:25 GMT -5
In principle, I am against violence as well (who says he is not against violence anyway?) but somehow the thing that you are talking about doesn't bother me. There must be a reason for this, which I'm not aware myself consciously. And in any case, there's nothing wrong with manipulating emotions. We humans are as much animals of emotion as we are of reason. Trying to touch one's emotion is just as valid as reaching to one's reason. A war is not a joke to begin with. It's not a laughing matter. So maybe one shouldn't expect to see funny things and be entertained that way by this show.
|
|
Choko
Junior Addict
Posts: 191
|
Post by Choko on Jul 10, 2005 0:44:18 GMT -5
Skinz, I guess you are talking about ep. 89. Aren't you? (Spoiler Alert) I was afraid that ep. 89 would show all the cruel tortures that were used on traitors during that period. (If you want to see some torture images, click here.) Korean newspapers reported that the scenes would seem to be a kind of "The Passion of the Admiral" and that every camera staffs were solemnly watching the actor while they were shooting. So I got nervous even before watching the show, but the actual scenes on TV were far more moderate than I imagined. (KBS, thank you for your decency)
|
|
|
Post by pakyownage4eva on Jul 10, 2005 10:59:14 GMT -5
I don't see anything wrong with it because it's all true. I don't know exactly what you're talking about but if it's partially about what the Japanese did, it's far censored than what they actually did.
It seems it's about something else though...to which I only pity the King Sonjo for being so inept. It makes the admiral even more remarkable and legendary.
|
|
concerns of a viewer
Guest
|
Post by concerns of a viewer on Jul 10, 2005 18:27:46 GMT -5
Yep i have no problem with the violence neither. I don't quite see why one must complain about a particular violent scene in Yi soon shin,when the series has plenty of violence in it already. With that said,It surprising to hear complaining of violence when one should be use to seeing it in this series by now. If you don't like violence,well then by all means please change channels or turn tv off. It urks me to no end when people complain about violence on tv shows like yi soon shin to broadcasters. All they end up doing is sanitizing the footage and ruining programs. thank you
|
|
|
Post by donilpark on Jul 10, 2005 18:54:33 GMT -5
Concern about violence on TV is valid. I just think it was not all that bad. Especially since this is not a violence with no reason. It gave the viewers a taste of what the criminals might have gone through in the period. But don't get it wrong. For as much as it looks cruel, Chosun dynasty did its best to protect the human rights of the suspects (at least human rights as they perceived it back then). Chosun's criminal law states that a suspect cannot be punished without the confession. So even if you had all the evidences against the guy, without his own confession of what he did, you couldn't punish him. They would keep torturing him until he confesses. But they didn't just keep on torturing. They had strict rules about what can and cannot be done to obtain confession. I don't know why I said this... But the point is that the violence you saw was not something pointless and unjustifiable (at least back then). It was a legal excercise of criminal laws.
|
|
|
Post by skinz on Jul 10, 2005 18:58:52 GMT -5
Yep i have no problem with the violence neither. I don't quite see why one must complain about a particular violent scene in Yi soon shin,when the series has plenty of violence in it already. With that said,It surprising to hear complaining of violence when one should be use to seeing it in this series by now. If you don't like violence,well then by all means please change channels or turn tv off. It urks me to no end when people complain about violence on tv shows like yi soon shin to broadcasters. All they end up doing is sanitizing the footage and ruining programs. thank you I knew some people would misunderstand my statement. My problem is NOT the violence of the scene, its the AMOUNT of violence that was shown. If the producers and directors wanted to show the brutality of tortures for traitors, why wasn't that amount of violence shown when the westerners in the royal court sent most of the easterners to torture earlier in the series? Why wasn't that amount of violence shown when one of Yi Soon Shin men did not follow his command in battle and was flogged? Hell, even the beginning of the invasion episode didn't have that much violence when everyone knows the horror the korean civilians suffered. Everyone always claim they have no problem with enormous violence because its not real, but as soon as reality hits and they witness such a thing in real life then it becomes an issue.
|
|
|
Post by pakyownage4eva on Jul 10, 2005 19:02:37 GMT -5
Well it seems the directors just love our pretty admiral so much that they want viewers to sympathize for him.
|
|
|
Post by BungalowDweller on Jul 10, 2005 19:12:50 GMT -5
Everyone always claim they have no problem with enormous violence because its not real, but as soon as reality hits and they witness such a thing in real life then it becomes an issue. Although I'm not certain if I've viewed the scene you're discussing Skinz, as I often tape and watch later, I'm in agreement with your statement here. Yes, violence is real, but it can be gratuitous. When it is used in such a fashion, I believe that it degrades the historical victims all over again. I find excessive violence unconscionable and hardly "entertainment". That's one reason I have a problem with so much American television. Especially the crime shows--probably written by bored white suburbanites that think all urban people are drug dealers, gang bangers, poor trash, etc. And the new trend of using child actors in roles as victims, is, in my opinion, s-i-c-k.
|
|
|
Post by FrederickII on Jul 10, 2005 22:43:10 GMT -5
Before the Battle of Okpo ep. there was a disclaimer warning all of you about the violence involved.
This violence has a historic purpose to it. Would you guys not want to show holocaust footage in high schools?
you can read about an atrocity but it is another thing to witness it, on TV or in person.
|
|
|
Post by donilpark on Jul 11, 2005 1:04:35 GMT -5
Perhaps because our admiral is the main character of the show? You know, they want to show you the life of the admiral in detail, not the easterners, westerners nor civilians. Also, in this drama, they made it clear that they want to emphasize Yi Sunshin as a human hero. The general sentiment and tendency toward him in Korea up to now was the image of him destroying Japanese warships on board a turtle ship, spewing out fire and firing cannons, long sword drawn and lifted high- almost a godlike hero. But this time, instead of doing that, they wanted to show us his agonies, his pains, his joys, and sadness-the human side of Yi Sunshin. This intention of the dramatists became evident in the King's line towards the end of the episode in question. He told Yi Sunshin how he looked like nothing more than an ordinary man after all he went through. (or soemthing like that. I don't remember the exact quote) So that's what I think. We do have to watch out for violence (or the level of it), but in any case, I don't think it was all that bad even if it were not for the intention of the dramatists.
|
|
|
Post by mikey on Jul 11, 2005 9:09:27 GMT -5
I guess I haven’t seen the specific incident skinz mentions yet, but I do have to say that I also sometimes think that KBS goes a little overboard with the violence in their historical dramas.
This isn’t so much about the battle scenes (violence there doesn’t bother me so much – hey, that’s war) but more in response to their often way-too-explicit torture scenes. Sometimes, these torture scenes just seem to go on and on.
I understand, of course, that the tortures really did take place (and they have to show that) - but do I really need to see each and every scream that comes from the unfortunate victims?
|
|
|
Post by Skinz UL on Jul 11, 2005 11:25:31 GMT -5
Okay, I can understand that he's the main character and that the audience will see everything through his eyes. But the way they illustrate it did the opposite thing that you described. Instead of seeing him more like a human being, the scene actually increased his god-like statue.
|
|
|
Post by donilpark on Jul 11, 2005 14:20:32 GMT -5
You think so? Well, I think not. I think it only shows him as a very determined human being, not a demigod. A god cannot be subject to pain or humiliation. He was, but he endured it. That's his greatness as a human. If he could avoid the arrest and torture by some means, (political, military) then it would have seem that he was standing above everything, like the King or the law.
|
|
|
Post by skinz on Jul 11, 2005 15:24:04 GMT -5
Before the Battle of Okpo ep. there was a disclaimer warning all of you about the violence involved. Sorry but I'm not talking about that. Everyone is getting confused with my statement. I talking about a scene in a future episode in IYSS. This violence has a historic purpose to it. Would you guys not want to show holocaust footage in high schools? There's a difference between showing violence and unnecessary violence. For example, watching a holocaust footage on the history channel or whatever show enough violence to tell the horrific story about that event. Now imagine if the footage showed the bullets being fired and a close up on the bullets tearing the flesh of human beings or having a camera inside the furnaces and seeing minute by minute the burning bodies. That's what I'm talking about unnecessary violence. The director knew exactly what he wanted to do in that scene and that's where I have the problem. He purposely shot unnecessary shots ie: the puddle of blood, the upside down hanging, the close-ups of the cuts,etc. just to increase something that could've been done better IMO. I will give the editors credit for not showing it for a full run and instead put other scenes in between it. When the episode airs in the states people are probably going to just brush it off and say its passion of the christ over again, but I just wanted to add my feelings on the matter.
|
|