Hacker Cinema
Cruel Intentions
1999 · Film · 97 min
Directed by Roger Kumble
Slaking a thirst for dangerous games, Kathryn challenges her stepbrother, Sebastian, to deflower their headmaster's daughter before the summer ends. If he succeeds, the prize is the chance to bed Kathryn. But if he loses, Kathryn will claim his most prized possession.
3 positive3 neutralfrom 6 commenters
Where to watch
No streaming data for this title.
Videos commenters linked
From YouTube links in the comments below. Most are clips and trailers; “Full” means the uploader says so.
6 comments on Hacker News
Movies I think I truly great I usually only watch once, sometimes twice. If a movie ends and I just sit there thinking to myself… “wow”… I will probably never watch it again.
Movies I watch over and over again are movies that I relate to in some way or find comforting. These are ones I’ve watched at least 5 times, and some I’d bet more than 30 times.
- Back to the Future
- Home Alone
- What About Bob?
- It Could Happen to You
- Matilda
- As Good as It Gets
- Office Space
- Cruel Intentions
- Boiler Room
- Finding Forrester
- Training Day
- Super Troopers
- 8 Mile
- The Transporter
- Elf
- Bad Santa
- Mean Girls
- Saved!
- Garden State
- V for Vendetta
- Thank You for Smoking
- Stick It
- Little Miss Sunshine
- Idiocracy
- Hot Rod
- Run Fatboy Run
- The Other Guys
- Wreck-It Ralph
To name a few.
Movies in the 90s and early 2000's were much better than the garbage we get today.
From T2, to Jurassic Park, to the Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Pulp Fiction, Eyes Wide Shut, Fight Club, Cruel Intentions, Mean Girls, 5th Element, Independence Day, etc.. etc..
Something happened after 2007-2008, perhaps it was the shift to digital, where filmmakers started relying more and more on special effects, and less on good acting and storytelling.
The first Iron Man and Avengers were great, but then the formula got very repetitive. None of the DC movies were good, Fast and the Furious are the same story on repeat, both comedies and romantic movies became dumber/more simplistic etc.. etc..
Movies became more like a circus show of forgettable digital effects and less about a good story that teaches something or leaves an impression.
I think streaming might be part of the problem (just lots of churn of a large quantity of low quality movies), but also the box industry started revolving too much around few large franchises, and everything else became a low budget niche.
I think there were still few good movies (Interstellar, Gone Girl, Midsommar, and Parasite), but still much fewer than the previous generation (91-2007), which I think it was a golden time for the movies.
All the statistics gleaned from incarceration surveys and law enforcement records cannot indubitably frame a police department for clear racism.
and
Conversely, all the statistics gleaned from incarceration surveys and law enforcement records cannot indubitably absolve a police department of clear racism.
It's just the nature of the beast.
Even if you were to be able to prove it, there will always be concern-trolls who argue,quite convincingly, that preventing police departments from aggressively enforcing the law (even with provisions such as Stop and Frisk in NYC) is in itself an injustice to the poor and vulnerable (many of whom might in fact be of the inflicted race, themselves).
Eg:
Barney Frank argues in favor of more policing of black neighborhoods as not doing so would be a disservice to the law abiding (black) residents who are also themselves victims of crime albeit from gang members who might be black,themselves. So STOP and FRISK is in essence justified, one could imply from Frank's rationale. This from an openly gay and progressive Democrat.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tW3xFGeGIWk&t=2m12s
General perception has always been the scale used to judge whether a party is at the receiving end of overt or covert racism.
Statistics have always been a sideshow. A sweetener, if you will, to seal the argument but not the primary means of smelling that something's awry in the way people are treated.
Whether it is community policing or non-discriminatory housing.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/12/business/economy/discrimination-in-housing-against-nonwhites-persists-quietly-us-study-finds.html
Justice Potter Stewart's thumb rule for ascertaining whether something fits the definition of hardcore pornography applies here: "I know it when I see it."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_know_it_when_I_see_it
Whether Atherton is the most fitting poster child for the kind of limousine liberalism that I described, is another matter altogether.
I wouldn't be one bit surprised if this happened in any of the most educated and virulently liberal nooks of the country.
The fact is it does exist and yes it is a thing.
It has been called the "Oh, don't give me any of that racist crap! My Husband and I gave money to Colin Powell!" strain of racism.
To remove the last remnants of niggling doubt from those who genuinely suspect that such a pattern of behavior actually exists among the most gifted, accomplished and refined, while wealthy, members of our society, I give you this memorable exchange from the movie Cruel Intentions:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bb2XlqE9OUg
This has always been there and given the current mores of our society, is likely to persist unless we shed our partisan coats and overhaul our approaches to solving societal problems in a wholesale way.
I moved here from LA. I found a small group of nice people, but it overall, it felt like I was in the movie Cruel Intentions
As much as I hate to plug this movie, "Cruel Intentions" had some amazing scenes where the main characters did just about every action correctly from this perspective.
Considering that you bring up the 'rough sex' twice, and in a way that makes it seem like the books are full of it and that sex forms a fundamental part of the stories and philosophy, I wonder what it is that makes this single one-page scene in one book the center piece of many reflections on her books on general. If it weren't for that one movie (was it "Cruel Intentions"?) I would've mostly forgotten about that passage. This may be because what is considered "highbrow literature" in my mother tongue (Dutch) contains (relative to English-language literature) a lot more sex, and in much more explicit and colorful ways (e.g. Jan Wolkers but also work by Belgians like Jef Geeraerts), and that reading works like these since early adolescence has blunted my sensitivity to this topic; but still - even when I try to abstract from that personal frame of reference, I find it hard to assign to them the weight that is often done (and that you are implying)
On top of that, I resent your attempt at an ad hominem by suggesting that the main audience is sexually hypertensive adolescents. Which is a shame because the rest of your post is sound (even if I don't agree with all of it), and the sophism detracts from that.