I think there are already a few topics like this one.

To sum up: some people dislike it in any context, some people think it's illogical to consider it really "bad", others avoid it just to not offend people, and some believe it more realistic since there are many real people who do it, and some think that it just doesn't fit with the child-like nature of LEGO, however, some find it humourous because it's a kid's toy.

Whatever you do, you do what you want.  It's your brickfilm, not ours.

Ducking heck! Shuck got duckin' real, ya fletchin' sunnava duck!

In all seriousness, I'm not a fan of naughty words in brickfilms. It just doesn't feel right, and I don't find it funny. Same with gun violence in brickfilms. I just don't like it.

I don't like swearing in brickfilms and I find it pretty pointless especially when it's constantly happening in the film and if you do put language in you should put a warning so people like me who don't like it can avoid the bad language.

Or if you are shooting for so much realism that you add language, why are you using a plastic kid's toy? Normally doing a live action film portrays a lot more realism than minifigures.

Getting the money for thousands of dollars worth of equipment, going and paying tons for location; getting actors and crew together is a lot more difficult than animating some Lego in your room.

While I agree that Legocloniac is being slightly hyperbolic, the fact remains that making a quality brickfilm is more feasible for the majority of young-ish people than making a quality live-action film. The necessity of having talented people physically on set for a live-action film is a huge impediment to people without a large circle of acquaintances. If you look at a selection of indie-films, it's usually clear when the director's ambition overreached his or her abilities/budget; that's not inherently a bad thing when your goal is to develop as a director in the long term. However, if you're just aiming to make quality films as a hobby, I'd argue that's more achievable with animation for most children and teenagers.

Swearing can be an artform when used correctly. Obviously, I refrain from it more in Brickfilms because the audience is younger and so they find swearing distracting (it can actually be quite funny coming up with overly-obvious ways of masking swearing - such as "Mother Duck" and "Dumb Feces"), although 'bugger' remains one of my favourite words because of how 'English' it sounds.

I think Billy Connolly put it best.

EDIT: I've just stumbled upon this video that I used to be a fan of when I was but a wee lad. Its...pretty bad. The Censored Version is actually slightly funnier (sometimes beeps are funnier than the actual thing), but its a prime example of swearing replacing wit. The idea that these Knights are completely breaking character starts off as funny (and the first guy getting eaten is actually really well timed), but it doesn't go anywhere and the whole novelty is that they swear a lot - which isn't a very original or amusing novelty. It would at least be funnier if this was a Christian Bale-style tirade launched at the group after some strong buildup.

Last edited by Max Butcher (September 14, 2013 (03:31pm))

I think there are multiple types of realism. Like Finding Nemo for example. The film itself is absurd, because the fish talk. Never mind the fact that clown fish are hermaphrodites in real life, while the two main ones are male in the film. So it is not realistic in that sense whatsoever. However the interactions between the characters, and the characters themselves, are very realistic. And I feel like cursing for realism falls into the second category, be it to preserve the integrity of a genre (cursing is a characteristic of some action movies for example) or to characterize (like what is a sailor without his curse words?)