Just wondering how many times you masturbated to them...or if like me, thought that second toe was WAY too long, like some kind of alien toe attached to some giant-ass flopping feet that...just no.
I relate to Tarantino's foot fetish, but as great as Uma might be, she doesn't have showoff-able feet imo. That is all I have to say about that.
Rude. Foot fetishists are some of the worst with their standards.
shareDon't remember ever seeing this, but yeah...once you start glorifying the perfect foot, anything less than just cannot be abided by. But...that being said, her second toe is enough of a beast that it should have been a deal breaker when it came to deciding on those closeups, cmon now lol
shareHer feet are ugly.
shareI don't think he has a foot fetish. I think he's trolling the prettier actresses in his movies out of spite.
The reason why I say this is that if someone had a foot fetish, they wouldn't go out of their way to use a camera and angle to make the feet look as disgusting and as ungainly as possible. They'd make the feet look sexy. He purposely shoots the feet to compete with the actress's face onscreen, so I think he does this as a way to demean them.
Here is a perfect example, from Once Upon a Time in Hollywood: https://i.insider.com/61558ced7b09e80018e57ea8?width=700
Foot fetish, I understand, but what is sexy or erotic about it? Her feet are deliberately dirty, too.
It's clear you know very little about foot fetish, yet you speak so authoritatively. Dirty feet are a thing for foot fetishes. It's very common.
Women being barefoot in common everyday situations is very erotic for someone with a foot fetish. Learn your subject.
Learn my "subject"? No, here's a subject for you to learn, too--fetishes are shaped by media. They're not inborn.
For example, back in the 1970s, men thought that seeing a "natural woman" was the hottest thing on earth. Now to them, seeing unnatural balloons, fake hair and a shaved snatch is the hottest thing to them.
It's the same with the whole fetish thing. You're not really arguing with someone who doesn't know the subject but someone who comes from another time when fetishes weren't as "crude" as what they are today or even when this movie was made. Point is that what you call your foot fetish was cultivated by changes in porn over the years, just as guys today think it's so natural and sexy to want to see women with monstrous boobs and completely shaved.
Personally, I think QT is humiliating his actresses because he comes from the generation when foot fetishes meant something very different than what he portrays in his movies. Before people think I'm crazy, here's a thread from people discussing their fetishes from the 1960s: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/themousepad/what-was-having-a-foot-fetish-like-in-the-1960s-t120956.html
You suffer from the Dunning-Kruger effect in a big way.
shareNo, you suffer from it.
Ooh, say it back to me!
See how that works? See how throwing around these empty, meaningless terms work?
I studied psychology, by the way. It's so funny how in the internet age, an entire generation of people who never picked up a book on psychology or psychiatry have created these pseudo-intellectual buzzwords to make themselves sound so intelligent and sophisticated.
There's no such thing as the Dunning-Kruger effect in psychology. This is a "pop psychology" term. This is one of those things that caught on in the internet, where neckbeards heard about some study, whipped up a pseudo-intellectual entry on it on Wikipedia, spread it as a meme on Wikipedia and then try to make it into some sort of "thing", so they can use to to defeat their opponents online.
It's like bullshit terms like "Mandela Effect" or "Barbara Streisand Effect." Bullshit. Take a random term, add "effect" to it and, "Oh, shit, it's a real psychological term now!"
I don't expect to change your mind on anything, but just know that the places that you haunt on the internet are kind of bullshit. The fact that you think Dunning-Kruger is a thing is proof of that.
The Dunning-Kruger effect is well studied and well documented.
Here's Psychology Today. But sure, I'll take the word of you, random moviechat poster, over that.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/dunning-kruger-effect
The concept of the Dunning-Kruger effect is based on a 1999 paper by Cornell University psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger. The pair tested participants on their logic, grammar, and sense of humor, and found that those who performed in the bottom quartile rated their skills far above average. For example, those in the 12th percentile self-rated their expertise to be, on average, in the 62nd percentile.share
Wow, are you down the rabbit hole or what?
1. This entire discussion started because I don't feel that QT's "foot fetish" is genuine. I think he's full of crap, like how he made a thing about loving Hong Kong cinema and loving Bruce Lee, only to crap all over both in recent interviews. I backed up my opinion by talking about how he shoots feet in a way that is demeaning to his actresses, not in a way that makes them look attractive or sexy.
2. That was a throwaway comment but now you want to start arguing me to death about all of this? What are you arguing about exactly? I said I don't think QT's foot fetishism is real. That's what I said. So, what on earth are you trying to accomplish? Do you really think you're going to change my mind about QT being phony by now getting into some ridiculous long-ass argument about the history of foot fetishism and what it is or isn't?
Do you understand that you're coming across as a bit unhinged, like it's not about disagreeing with me that QT is trolling his actresses but getting mad at me at potentially blowing the illusion that he might not be one of you?
If that's what's bothering you, I'm sorry if I did that. But I'm not going to spend the better part of my afternoon arguing with you about this. This is ridiculous. I stand by my comment that I don't believe that QT has a fetish or that if he does, he's being disingenuous about it and using it as an excuse to demean his leading ladies.
That is all.
I'm with you...and have to agree that now that the Dunning Krueger effect, or whatever its called, has been introduced into the popular lexicon, its become more of a buzzword, a put-down for those with that kind of a knee-jerk reaction to being contradicted.
It doesn't nearly have the clout it could have if it were used less frequently like that.
But yeah, I'm also thinking of Tarentino insisting that he be the one to choke that one actress in Inglorious Basterds...are there other things?
I could see him having some other motivation for portraying feet the way he does, is all...that's an interesting take that'll have to be explored further =]
Your link proves the exact opposite of what you are claiming. The foot fetish pre-dates modern porn and the internet.
Clearly, the fetish was there, the desire was there, but the content was unavailable. Your conclusion is the equivalent of "wet roads cause rain."
Part of me actually feels bad for those of you who grew up with the internet. You never had the chance to experience "the hunt" for good material. There was an amazing feeling when you'd come across a great image in a catalog after searching for a long time
I cut out all the good feet pics I could find and glued them into a scrapbook for *future reference* LOL! We had a lot of great stuff on TV that we could not save. VCR's didn't become affordable untilshare
the early 80's. You couldn't program them anyway. LOL!!! You had to have some kind of advance notice and try to hit the record button in enough time. Or wait until summer when they showed the episode
again. People and US magazines were a really good resource for semi-grainy celeb foot pics back then. And scanners cost big money.............so you would have to wait until someone
had the time and ability to scan......and with a 56k modem it took 3 or 4 weeks to download a photo that was only 20 or 25kbs.
You kids have no fuckin' idea how hard it was for us old-school dudes! LOL!!
No troll, you're definitely born with it. You have no clue what you're talking about.
shareThat's amazing...I never considered that...
Also in the same movie, the hippy girl with her feet smashed up against the windshield? They looked pretty bad there too..
Yeah that's something to think on...it really does seem like he went out of his way to make sure the feet don't come across as "pretty".
I like the longer second toe and high arches, so Uma is a good fit for my preferences. Her big toe is a little off, but I prefer the sole view anyway, so it's not a deal breaker.
Maybe five times or less.
Never liked Uma Thurman as she's a little too tall and has somewhat masculine features, and is trashy in Pulp Fiction especially.
I do have a foot fetish, and am quite an expert in this regard. However, while I can't speak for everyone, I do think it there are a lot of incorrect assumptions made about it particularly by women.
Dudes, let me ask you. Isn't it still more about the woman in general? Her face, attributes, features, demeanor, and just the presentation in general? The male brain (perhaps human brain in general) is like a combination lock working to unlock a sexual euphoria, and instead of tumblers you have voice, face, legs, feet, breasts, hair, eyes, lips, all being conceptialize to make one perfect picture. And her soul and experiences matter to us, whereas women focus on material things like cash, security and cars.
(Visually for women, it's perhaps, teeth, chin, muscles, hands, eyes, attitude and confidence, whatever else, too? But they are such simpletons about it all.)
Don't be like that. Sometimes you write/talk about them like you are a breeder examining a horse. 2nd toe is too long, soles are dirty, breasts not perky enough, etc. While things like this can make a slight difference, there is no need to objectify to this extent and I believe it's unhealthy to do so. I don't think women are immune to this, either, in fact I think they are worse about it and typically project their own degeneracy onto men.
But we don't need to play into their hands. We are gentlemen. They are children. Our brain is superior, as are our powers of visualization, deduction and fantasy. Our motivation is unparalleled and we are cunning & savvy with our lust. Be proud of your masculinity, and never reduce it to toe-length, pedicures and polish. That's their department where they play their little ridiculous games.
Also, I think QT is authentic & no one who has or understands a foot fetish could possibly consider his work humilating or dehumanizing to the actress.