Nan implies she has knowledge of the state of the others' consciences. What
gall. I'm wondering how she came about this knowledge. I thoroughly enjoy
Tarantino's films, so apparently I'm harboring a guilty conscience?
Must be nice to have figured everyone out by what films they happen to enjoy.My conscience may or may not be in pristine, gently used or heavily
soiled condition, but I do know the difference between reality and make believe,
and my kids do too. You don't dig on violent shows; goody for you. Violence
has been entertaining people ever since entertainment has existed. Shakespeare,
for one, was a sick puppy. Being able to enjoy "Django Unchained" has
zero, bupkis, notta, zilch, less than none to do with my inclination to help
"alleviate suffering." That is, REAL suffering.As for the
earlier dig at Tarantino being a "grown man going on 12," that's
exactly why he makes great movies. There are plenty of directors with good table
manners. QT isn't bogged down by the desire to keep things within the
bounds of good taste. That appeals to you or it doesn't.
To me, violence has the result that someone suffers (whether in reality or in
the imagination). Why does anyone find that which causes suffering to be
entertaining or appealing? I don't spend any money on movies so I
don't help keep the violent producers or the family friendly producers in
business, but I'll gladly try to help alleviate suffering when I can. I
wish we were more interested in helping out humanity, and other creatures of the
planet, than being entertained by pathetic productions. No doubt I'm out of
touch, but my conscience is in better condition.
@Eric Samuelsen,I'd like to see your "evidence" of no
connection or that violent movies somehow decrease violence. Weird.i've got plenty of research on my side.
I doubt for the vast majority of people/kids the violence portrayed has little
tangible effect. The problem is that there is a very small % of people, like
with most things, where it does/can have an effect. I suspect that is why the
"evidence" is lacking with respect to a causal relationship. It simply
happens in very small %'s and therefore is difficult to capture or
measure.I have two boys in my house and they both game the same
amount (I put a timer on the xbox) and the behavior of one clearly demonstrate
to me, in my opinion, there is undoubtedly a link. Also an observable
difference between gaming or not gaming at all and the amountof time playing.That being said it is not reasonable to use the "shotgun"
approach to this and ban everything for everyone. I just have to be diligent in
adjusting the environment and be more observant with that particular son since
he is more susceptible.The duplicitous behavior of hollywood is
despicable yet totally predictable. They pour out the violence and profit from
the violence yet can't wait to look holier-than-thou standing in front of a
I have a visceral and mental reaction to these 'chainsaw' type movies.
For me, the effect of the movie on the viewer is real. To that, I react the best
way I can. I stay away.
"Movies are about make-believe. It's about imagination. Part of the
thing is we're trying to create a realistic experience, but we are faking
it. And the faking it is the art."- Quentin Tarentino_____________________________Art? Tarantino called it
disrespectful to victims of Newtown to link the tragedy to movies. In the same
interview, he used the words “fun” and “cool” to
describe the graphic violence in his latest film, Django. It’s his right
to call his filmmaking art. But his Oscar and Golden Globe won’t impress
me much as long as he keeps using film to treat violence as a comic farce. Good
fiction is a lie that helps us to see a nobler truth. When Tarantino says things
like said in the interview, he’s talking like a grown man going on twelve.
Also, there's no evidence linking violent movies to violent behavior, and a
great deal of evidence to the contrary.
Yes, it certainly can't be that these movies are successful because people
actually like them (I didn't see any of them, but not because they're
violent, they just don't appeal to me).It must be because there
weren't many other options, they had some stars that were relevant to
certain demographics, and because they were successfully marketed.Only violent movies achieve success under these conditions right?(Obviously the Deseret News is trying to make excuses, as they constantly try
to convince us all movies should be "family friendly, as these are the
movies that make the most money. Of course, a profit is a profit. Many family
movies fail, despite making 100s of millions of dollars, because they cost even
more to make.)Hooray for niche markets. The free market at work.I can't wait till The Last Stand comes out. Arnold Schwarzenegger,
Kim Ji-woon, and Lionsgate... fanatstic.
Until enough people raise a stink about it, nothing will change. This is one of
the ironies of America: we call ourselves (mostly) Christian and yet love
violence as a form of entertainment and see nothing wrong with hoarding assault
weapons in our homes.