Your blue tooth was on and open and someone put it there without your permission. Happens all the time.
Only in some genres.
I see your point with the King Lear connection, however consider this: NBH3 represents an earlier work from which King Lear is derived! No you say? Just think about this: Black = dark. and when its dark outside you should be careful. also if someone is naughty you should also be careful. Careful + Careful= Leary. Now then, a mans home is his castle. if a man lives in a castle, so does his wife. who else lives in a castle? A KING!! Leary, king= King Lear! My god, it so blatant it screams off the page! Watch the first seven minutes and see if you don’t come to the same conclusion. And leaving the DVD on a bus is just a poor attempt by so called Shakespearean scholars to hide this work from the light of truth! We should call someone in Washington or England.
A tenuous arguement at best. Clearly the current DVD plotting was developed much after Shakespeare’s time, using Lear only as a base for its tale of tragic housewife debauchery. Indeed, there is little evidence that queening stools were used at all prior to the 1800’s, much less as actual thrones for royalty. Need I remind you that King Lear was first performed in 1606?
According to the credits, NBH3 was written by Frank Bakkin and Kristi Merlot. Unfortunately, I have been unable to discover anything more about any other possible collaborative works by this duo —despite the best efforts of Google. However, unless you can explain the obvious anachronisms in the current Greyhound deposited pornographia, I think your theory is unsupportable.
Why didn’t you return it to its rightful owner?
I assume you stood, holding it above your head, and called out, very loudly, “If whoever dropped their copy of ‘Naughty Black Housewives 3’, starring Megan Vaughn, wants it back I’ve got it right here. Anyone? Well I’ll be sitting right here if you want to be discreet.”
Greyhound-deposited pornographia? I think that is an unsupported assumption. Nowhere does the OP say that the disc was left on an inter-city bus. It’s quite possible that local transit was involved. Of course, using local transit would dramatically lower distribution costs, while reducing the distribution area.
Unless multiple distribution areas are involved, this hints at a production enterprise limited by budget constraints. Could this be the reason for the decline in production values? Yes, basing the material off Shakespeare is initially impressive; but given the Bard’s love of bawdy humour, plus his works’ current out-of-copyright status, it’s clear that using Shakespeare as source material is actually the bargain-basement option! The producers would have had to pay much more for an original screenplay.
Other hints of budget constraints include the use of autotuning in the theme vocals, and the bluescreened backgrounds in the car-chase scenes. I never thought I’d ever see a repeating background in a non-cartoon work, for example; the protagonists pass the same red house no less than 13 times in one two-minute driving scene. This film has ‘direct-to-video’ written all over it. Why, I bet that no 35-mm prints were ever made!
Point taken. However, one can certainly argue that The Merry Wives of Windsor would have been a so much more appropriate source material for the DVD in question. Such a centralized comedic production would naturally (and more likely!) be found on a local line. When we look at the breadth of Lear, it seems more probable that a Greyhound or perhaps a Trailways was involved. You can’t have tragedy on a local line.
Perhaps the OP can clear this up.
I can’t believe the OP watched it! Didn’t your phone ring after!? Look, you need to burn 5 copies immediately and drop them places where people will find them.
If not… in seven days… Megan Vaughn will take your Ring…! :eek:
Actually that is the easiest to explain by example. I have in my collection a VHS video of James Earl Jones as King Lear (1974), and a DVD of Derek Jacobi (2011) as King Lear. Thus the existence of a modern media performance does not preclude the existence of an earlier presentation. And while some modern scholars argue on who inspired the Bard ( Chaucer, Plutarch?) or even who wrote the vast volume of work ( Bacon? (MMmmmmm) its easy to make some comparisons. Also, the existence of modern appliances in a movies does not negate it’s basis in an earlier work. Ian Mckellen’s Richard III (1995) has tanks and aircraft which I don’t believe were seen in the original 1591 performance.
I can’t answer your question because I don’t watch such trash.
And kindly return my DVD.
But that is not your argument as I understand it. If the bulk of NBH3 predates Lear, then the modern devices (plot and otherwise) that are such an integral part of the DVD erotic production would necessarily have had to exist in some form prior to 1606. Clearly they did not. Thus it follows that for your inane theory to be correct, there must have been an earlier source production for both works that was more NBH3 and less King Lear. I do not see how this might be possible, irregardless of how many DVDs of modernized PBS-friendly Shakespearean sagas exist at the public library.
Consider this from King Lear:
Cordelia: “I cannot heave my heart into my mouth.”
and this from NBH3:
Cordelia: “I cannot help but heave your part into my mouth, big boy.”
The term “big boy” would not have been used in the seventeenth century.
Furthermore, the Duke of Albany in NBH3 is from New York. 'Nuff said.
In my younger, more emotional days, I would’ve treated such a find like winning the lottery.
Since then, I’ve learned the hard way that at least 80% of commercial adult video is about as erotic as a toxic chemical spill (and sometimes looks like it). I am now VERY particular in what I decide to keep and probably wouldn’t even look at some random lost item on a bus.
“Naughty”? Pah. Red flag. Pass.
Indeed. My first reaction was outrage that an adult (I presume the original poster is an adult) would pick up something that would be worth so much to a starry-eyed young lad.
But then it occurred to me that starry-eyed young lads can just rustle up all the filth they could ever want on the internet nowadays. I was born in the wrong era…
EDIT: I can’t comment on how accessible pornography is to the average Trinidadian teenager, though.
The bus driver called - your DVD is overdue.