we do not want our mtv - Page 3

mpittman · 11-29-2005, 07:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Satchmo8101

There is also the entire Boy Wonder and Batgirl issue, he has to answer to.

Ohhhhh, those videos. Hell yeah, those things should be censored. Utility belt indeed.

panbient · 11-29-2005, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TEMPTED

ok aside from mtv, tell me why the original video can't be viewed anywhere else? even on the internet. you have an answer for that? of course you do. lemme have it dude.

i didn't have a problem watching it. host a torrent for it and offer it up to the web. people will download it if it's good and it'll spread from there.

btw that was a great river of tears up there. kudos to you

hehehe

TEMPTED · 11-29-2005, 07:41 PM

he haw I wish you could see me right now, I'm totally laughing

and flicking you off.

the director's cut isn't the original, scenes were deleted.

Chiva · 11-29-2005, 07:44 PM

because WATCHING STUFF ON THE INTERNET IS STEALING!

Satchmo8101 · 11-29-2005, 07:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TEMPTED

he haw I wish you could see me right now, I'm totally laughing

and flicking you off.

the director's cut isn't the original, scenes were deleted.

I am sure, panbient went off to slit his wrist after hearing this bit of news.

Of course, he could be sitting there laughing at you and flicking you off. He could also be taking a drink of water or intaking some Ganja.

In other words, who cares what you or anyone else is doing?

TEMPTED · 11-29-2005, 07:57 PM

booo tragic. why didn't you have a reply satchmo? I'm shocked.

Satchmo8101 · 11-29-2005, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TEMPTED

booo tragic. why didn't you have a reply satchmo? I'm shocked.

Well if you could understand what you read, I believe I already answered the question. But apparently, you're too busy flicking off and laughing at panbient.

Chiva · 11-29-2005, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TEMPTED

message from the director

oh and fuck off panbien thanks

this video has been about censorship from the moment i proposed the idea. you were looking at a leaked, unfinished rough cut of a video attempting to address about 40 cuts mtv had asked us to make so they'd even air the video.

the unfortunate problem mtv had with censoring the video is that there was nothing explicit in the video to take out to begin with. they were trying to censor an idea, which is really hard to do. the video is deliberately unsettling. to me it's about the end of the line of american behaviour - bad fart jokes, pornography, voyeurism, old women and their fucked up intimate relations with pets because human beings just don't cut the mustard, technology driving us away from one another by bringing us closer to one another in other more obscene ways, etc. but is there really any actual sexual content in this video? not really. christina aguilera shakes her booty with a gaffer-taped thong two inches from the camera for three minutes and that's ok, but we can't show a blurred out image of women wearing bikinis in a magazine in a wide shot for half a second, at least according to mtv, because it's disgraceful to women. what does this actually mean? is mtv up in arms about lesbians on a rooftop, or are they disturbed by how the lesbians on the rooftop are presented - as material for a man to jerk off to in the dark? by showing the end result of the pornographic chain maybe i've done something truly disturbing. i've shown what people do when they go home at night and sit in front of their computers. now that's a censorable offense!

what mtv eventually forced me to take out caused the video's narrative through-line to fall apart. it got so bad, in fact, that i took my name off the video, the first time i've ever had to do something like that. they drove what i was saying into the proverbial closet, as it were.

the censorship on this video has so many layers to it it's staggering. it began before we even started filming it, fueled by a statement made by julian in all good humor about the possibility of "full frontal nudity" being in their next video and that "mtv will never air it". that comment created a buzz storm on the internet and started the narrowing-down process of what the video was going to be allowed to be in everyone's heads. that is to say, people began to expect something that i never intended to deliver, a XXX video in a compartmentalized way that they were used to getting. but people are barfing in this video. scumbags with DV cameras are filming cheesy hookers on a roof. a woman is driven to orgasm by her dog through a ritual of scrubbing a floor with champagne so he'll finally bark at her. gay men are hooking up in bathrooms and they don't even know or care what the other person looks like. that's not sexy, it's fucked up and disturbing. for a reason! i'm holding up a mirror to the parts of our culture that are gross and tasteless. that's why the video makes you want to take a shower when you're done watching it. it's intended to have that effect.

when the video finally surfaces, people are so unsettled by it that everyone wants to censor it. RCA wants to censor the first version because they think it's too violent and won't even show it to the band. MTV wants to censor an approved version because it's so unsettling. i suggest using censors as a way of getting around the problem like "scene deleted". the band doesn't want to use censors on the censored version as it censors their own air time. to be fair, the band didn't want to use censors for another reason: they were tired of going up against mtv and losing the battle. they've been doing that for five years. fair enough, we all reasoned, at least we have our director's cut.

so much has happened since my delivery of the director's cut to the band - who fought tooth and nail for me to have it, btw - that i've actually altered my own cut in an attempt to keep up with the entire experience. i've created a "censored director's cut" for my own site and reel. it's the most artistically truthful representation of an entire process which has been so totally focused on censorship to begin with. plus having another version (i think there's like 10 now) is like figuring out a puzzle inside of a maze while being stuck inside of a looking glass. you saw the director's cut? oh... but you didn't see the real director's cut, the one with the censors on it. no, not that one, but that one... and you should have seen what the director left out! it's scandalous! what a wonderfully fitting, enigmatic end to an awfully long process of delivering a creatively and sexually neutered video: the director's vision is censored, and in being censored he ends up saying more than he ever could have with the video in any way shape or form, by censoring his own final product... with help from you!

the end has no end, indeed.

rawK!
mike p.

For some twenty years the Oxford Text Archive has been collecting electronic texts, and has sponsored extensive research involving the use of SGML in an academic setting. The Archive is "a facility provided by Oxford University Computing Services and forms part of the Humanities Computing Unit . . . serving the interests of the academic community by providing low-cost archival and dissemination facilities for electronic texts."

"The Archive contains electronic versions of literary works by many major authors in Greek, Latin, English and a dozen or more other languages. It contains collections and corpora of unpublished materials prepared by field workers in linguistics. It contains electronic versions of some standard reference works. It has copies of texts and corpora prepared by individual scholars and major research projects worldwide. The total size of the Archive exceeds a gigabyte and there are over 2000 titles in its catalogue." [from the "General Information" page]

"All texts which are publicly available from the Archive's FTP server are first converted to a standard format. This format conforms to the recommendations of the Text Encoding Initiative (TEI), and is therefore an application of ISO 8879, Standard Generalized Mark Up Language (SGML). A catalog of electronic texts in the Archive is available in SGML format. OTA is also the authoritative FTP site for a significant corpus of literary texts encoded in (TEI) SGML by members of the Oxford Text Archive project and by others. An October 1996 snapshot of the OTA file listings provided here illustrates the range of texts in SGML format available to the academic public via FTP; (compare: snapshot of date: December 2, 1994).

The University of Virginia has pioneered a number of highly successful uses of (TEI) SGML in delivering online electronic texts, including structured-text searches. "Since 1992, the Electronic Text Center at the University of Virginia has combined an on-line archive of thousands of SGML-encoded electronic texts (some of which are publicly available) with a library-based Center housing hardware and software suitable for the creation and analysis of text. Through ongoing training sessions and support of individual teaching and research projects, the Center is building a diverse user community locally, and providing a model for similar enterprises at other institutions." The Text Center, in cooperation with the Bibliographical Society of the University of Virginia is making Studies in Bibliography [On-Line] freely accessible on the Internet, based upon TEI-SGML encoding of the (ca. 1000) articles.

Many of the texts in UVA's Electronic Text Center are indexed with Open Text's PAT search engine. Some of the materials are available only to UVA's institutional members (OED 2nd edition, English Poetry Full-Text Database, Patrologia Latina, Old English Corpus, Shakespeare, French and Latin Collections). Other online texts are searchable by any researchers via the Internet, including a Middle English corpus (see bibliography), Michigan Early Modern Materials, King James Bible, and others.

Under the direction of John Price-Wilkin, the Humanities Text Initiative at the University of Michigan is developing a set of online text resources, some of which employ SGML encoding as a basis for search and retrieval. Currently available to the public via WWW browser (as an interface to PAT): TEI Guidelines for Electronic Text Encoding and Interchange (P3), Middle English Collection, Revised Standard Version of the Bible, King James Version of the Bible, Michigan Early Modern English Works (16 MB of SGML-tagged text). The center also supports other reference material restricted to the University of Michigan: (OED 2nd edition, English Poetry Database, Old English Corpus, Migne's Patrologia Latina, Modern English Works. Many of the tools mirror (functionally) the resources at UVA, previously developed by John Price-Wilkin.

Texts structured in SGML are searchable by the PAT "SGML" software (from Open Text), and user interfaces to PAT are provided on the Internet using WWW forms and line-mode access. Short segments of text in a hit list reveal the SGML tags, but linking to the full text from the concordance (hit list) presents the document in a formatted appearance.

hah, made you read

TEMPTED · 11-29-2005, 08:18 PM

what

I really don't know why you're defending him or why you're talking about ganja and making personal comments. I was totally kidding so really, stop being so ridiculous.

the first amendment would work for the internet unless they're like state filtering laws but really, the original uncensored video should be viewable but it's not. I haven't seen it.

not directed at satchmo8101 from here on...

the point I wanted to make and for you dolts to discuss was the merits of kids watching christina or shitney videos and absorbing indirect sex but not being able to see gay loving and other forms of overt or direct sexual activity which we've all been accustomed to already. ok if thats so bad, fine, its been censored and watered down but its still never going to be played. it didn't make any sense to me but if it does to you dudes, whatever it's dunzo.

Seerix · 11-30-2005, 12:04 AM

You know, you really don't have to watch that shitty station. You could just turn the damn thing off. Then you wouldn't be going on about this obvious publicity stunt.

If Christina is still on your radar, that's a sure sign you need to go look somewhere else and stop watching MTV. Life really does get better when you can not only listen to better music, but when you can find real everyday examples of censorship going on right now that maybe you aren't even aware of because some spoiled-brat rock group isn't involved.

As for the showing of the video, I don't see why they don't just show it on their site, unless, like many corporate payroll bands, their site is actually owned by the label.