Hi Scott, hi Rebecca:
May I add that one could also say that "especially if it [the movie] was
(NORTH) AMERICAN written of (NORTH) AMERICAN-played, it might use more
formal English" (this might exclude a more recent strand of Hollywood
movies, of course). I just had to point that out, but, you BE the judge
(NAmE, alright?)
Stefan

bolstar1 wrote:
>
> --- In DSNA@yahoogroups.com <mailto:DSNA%40yahoogroups.com>, "Rebecca
> Shapiro" <shapiro.becca@...>
> wrote:
> >
> Rebecca: Hi. It happens that I was working on a quote in Shakespeare
> this morning that he (Shakey) had the prescience to write in 1603 for
> you: FIRST LORD: "He hath out-villained villainy so far that the
> rarity redeems him." (All's Well That Ends Well 4.3.278-79).
> I've heard "villain" used in the context you mentioned, but you
> were right about it not being current -- it seems a bit old. The bad
> guys could also be said to "wear the black hats" or be "the scum" or
> be "the bottom-feeders" or "low-lifers."
> If the movie was from '71, and especially if it was English-
> written or English-played, it might use more formal English -- the
> type of English that "villain" would be well-suited for.
> Scott N.
>
> > Hello. I just joined the list . . .
> >
> > I have a quick question. I saw the movie Bank Job, which takes
> place in 1971
> > in London. Some characters described others as "villains" (bad guys,
> > illegal, dangerous, etc.). I was surprised to hear it used that way-
> -I'd
> > thought it was obsolete in that context. Is anyone familiar with
> that
> > particular usage?
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Rebecca Shapiro
> >
> >
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>