MovieChat Forums > Age of Consent (1969) Discussion > Asinine 60's crapola

Asinine 60's crapola

posted 17 years ago by dhmason6155
13 replies | jump to latest

This movie was 60's drivel from start to finish (and yes, I was there). The only saving grace was Helen Mirren's naked body. James Mason was a totally unpleasant, self centered tightass and a lousy artist to boot. Were we really supposed to believe the bunk he produced was actually sellable? Maybe as airport restroom wallpaper.

This movie was really only about a middle aged man getting some hot young tail. Forget all the pretentious "artistic inspiration" BS. Nothing wrong with that (the young tail part), but don't try to pass it off to me as something noble. Good thing for James the local cop turned a blind eye and grandma was finally out of the way. They didn't waste any time shedding tears for her did they?

"I only took six minutes"
"I can kill twenty men in six minutes"

[–] lastmidnite2 17 years ago

You missed the entire point of the movie! Why should they shed tears for that nasty selfish old bitch? And the movie is not about Mason chasing young tail, that was Lolita.

[–] dhmason6155 17 years ago

Lolita AND this movie. The old lady may have been nasty, but she and the cop were conveniently out of the way by the end of the film. James wasn't very nice to the spinster either. In the universe of this movie, old ugly people don't count when they get in the way of having sex with hot chicks.

Why did James Mason show up in both films in the first place? There may have been something to the story at one time, but IMHO, it degenerated into a bunch of self indulgent crap.

"You're late"
"I only took six minutes"
"I can kill twenty men in six minutes"

[–] lastmidnite2 17 years ago

Well, in my case, I was expecting a really bad boring movie that I'd turn off half way through, but I was pleasantly surprised, and ended up really enjoying it. I realize it can't compare to Powell's earlier films, but I thought it was a fine final film of a great director. But of course everything is subjective, so I guess it's just a case of different strokes!

[–] dhmason6155 17 years ago

True. If you're referring to Helen Mirren, "stroke" is an apt choice of words.

"You're late"
"I only took six minutes"
"I can kill twenty men in six minutes"

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dhmason6155 17 years ago

Well it was the 60's.

The Wookie has no pants.

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dhmason6155 17 years ago

You're quite right, but the 60's and 70's were the decades of experimental, cutting edge filmmaking, when people showed hairy armpits. This is a movie about a 50 year old man having a love affair with a 16 year old girl so it would seem her armpits are almost beside the point.

The Wookie has no pants.

[–] willjohn 14 years ago

The film was based on a semi-autobiographical book written in 1935 by Norman Lindsay, a very successful painter in his own right.

[–] jd-276 14 years ago

Forget all the pretentious "artistic inspiration" BS. Nothing wrong with that (the young tail part), but don't try to pass it off to me as something noble.

Then you can reciprocate. Stop trying to pretend you understood it enough to be critical of the artistic angle. What are you anti-artists so afraid of? That you won't understand something? Subtlety passed you by? Just because you learnt "asinine" in "Word For the Day" that doesn't mean you have the mental powers to cut through what you claim is BS.

Norman Lindsay was a prominent Australian artist and author whose paintings and drawings were rather more sexual than what was traditional. I would have expected his writing style to be no different.

You could have taken it up with him. He was a useful pugilist in his day. Would that qualify him as being able to cut through the nancy-boy, artsy-fartsy BS in your eyes?

[–] willjohn 11 years ago

The film was based on a Norman Lindsay novel written in 1938.

[–] armagecko 9 years ago

I agree. Underwhelming.

[–] willjohn 9 years ago

The film was based ion the book of the same name written years before by artist Norman Lindsay.