Entertainment

April 13, 2008

This is a compilation of violent scenes from films. This video is meant as a rhetorical critique regarding the amount and varying degrees of violence being filmed as a means of entertainment. I wonder if a violent scene, even if used with purpose (as, ironically, was my intent for this very video!), serves nothing but to perpetuate and encourage violence itself. I wonder what it says about the state of our society that we not only view these films, but encourage the production of them.

Be advised that this video is extremely violent, watch it at your own discretion.

The following is an excerpt from a previous discussion with a friend…. there is far more and this friend did punch many, many holes in my argument, but I will just post a general glimpse of my inner confusion in relation to this topic.  I do not know what to think, but I do know that I do not think violence in film should be banned.  That said, after making this video and thinking about it, I am not sure if I would ever myself create a certain type of violent film…. or watch and be blindly entertained by violent films in the same manner.  The research that went into the creation of this video made me physically sick. 

I think a problem with cinema, in general, is that it portrays people in black and white, good and bad… and once somebody is “bad” it is somehow okay to smash their head in with a baseball bat. Isn’t it a little odd that often the “good guy” kills far more people than the bad? You don’t think there’s something wrong with applauding death, no matter the circumstance? Furthermore, I think their is a transference of those ideals to everyday life; black and white, us and them, and i think that is dangerous, because it gives “us” justification to kill, an obvious example being war. I’m sure you and I aren’t pro-war, but the fact is nevertheless wars occur. I love that you trust people, but I don’t know if I do, so much around me says otherwise.

It seems that the nature of film encourages us to give more credence to the reason than the fact. Is that right or wrong? I don’t know, but it’s interesting to me…. our evaluation of reason will constantly change, but what is will never leave us. 100 years ago people truly believed that segregating First Nations people into reservations, and filtering their children through residential schools would help ease our cultures together…. now what do we believe? All I know is that it is true that killing is wrong, and if I show it, even if I believe my audience will know better, even if I believe my intentions just, I will never escape the fact that I am showing it.

Just because something is fantasy, it does not mean it cannot affect us or affects us less. Ifanything, I believe it can affect us more! Because as we enjoy these things we absolutely let our guards down. For example, there are hundreds of stories in the bible, parables, that are clear cut fantasy, yet people obviously take those lessons to heart; a metaphor can be more powerful than fact. Further yet, the creator is a person in himself – what does it mean when people choose to fantasize about things like, for instance, “Natural Born Killers?” Is it okay that we are giving people a way to express abusive behavior? Just because you would never do these bad things we see, and I know you never would, is it okay to laugh/be entertained by it? What if somebody is entertained by watching simulated, fake, staged child pornography, is it okay for them to watch that under the condition they would never act on it? How about that genre of extreme torture porn?

There are many examples of children and adults directly emulating behavior on television and cinema. In Norway two children beat another child to death, it was later found that they did so because they were trying to be like the Power Rangers! In the U.S. a teenager shaved his head, and killed his parents after watching “Natural Born Killers.” John Hinkley, an adult, shot Ronald Reagan to impress Jodie Foster, or rather, a character she played in a film (Taxi Driver). You can say that these people are screwed up to begin with, but that is like saying people will kill anyway, why restrict gun access? Furthermore, these instances, and there are many more, are directly inspired by violence in film. That is, I believe that if said violent films did not exist, these specific cases would have never happened. My dilemma is – what happens if I make a violent film, and I find out that somebody, somewhere, killed another directly because of my film? Am I really going to say they would’ve killed somebody, someday, anyway? How could I forgive myself? I know I can’t live life being afraid of the actions my choices might incur on others, but I also can’t make blind choices. It’s a delicate line, I don’t have an answer.

Their was an interesting study I just read about – basically, it analyzed crime rates in the United States, Canada and South Africa between the years 1945 to 1974 when South Africa did not have television whereas both the United States and Canada had television. His results concluded that the homicide rate in the United States increased by 93 percent [and] in Canada the homicide rate increased 92 percent. In South Africa the homicide rate declined by 7 percent. I mean, there are so many things that point to violence in media as a definite problem. Am I going to disregard that, because its not a problem for me?

Entry Filed under: diva 200, opinion, youtube. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

2 Comments Add your own

  • 1. webdiva  |  April 15, 2008 at 6:28 am

    I’ve thought a lot about violence, not specifically in media, but in humans in general. I read an interesting book a couple of years ago called the chalice and the blade, which suggested that human history goes through cycles of violence and non-violence. (Written from a feminist perspective, the author argued that there is evidence to support the notion of historical matriarchal societies. She suggested that these societies were peaceful, agrarian – the chalice, rather than focused on war and conquest – the blade. I enjoyed reading that there may have been societies that were peaceful, as so many argue that violence is intrinsically human). The question that i still have is whether violence/force is ever justified. If i am a pacifist, and eschew violence/am peacefully living life, and someone uses violence and force against me – what do I do? Do I fight back, or not?
    On another note, the crime rate survey that you mention above is ironic, because those dates in South Africa coincide with the establishment of apartheid: a system of violence if ever there was one, although perhaps not called “crime” by the statisticians

    Reply
  • 2. ericsanpablo  |  April 15, 2008 at 8:52 pm

    I think it leads back to the paradox we were discussing – that sometimes in order to change a system, one must become a part of it. But it seems that way of thinking is entirely self defeating! Which I guess is the concern I had making this project, which, admittedly, depicts brutal violence – I am somewhat disgusted at myself for making it, in a way I feel I might have succumbed to the very thing I set out fighting.

    Yeah the apartheid in South Africa was brought to my attention. It really negates that quote/statistic, and opened my eyes to things I had never really understood happened. It’s pretty horrific how relatively recent it was. Strangely, it seems not so dissimilar to Canada’s (for instance) treatment of its indigenous people. I guess these are the most disastrous consequences of colonization (and really speaks to that idea of the victor writing history and interpretation). It is vaguely disturbing to me speaking for change, when sometimes my ability to speak may have been wrought at the hands of the people I wish to “help.”

    Wasn’t violence/force necessary in order for change to occur in that instance (South Africa) as well? And what about places like (the most obvious examples) Rwanda and Darfur? What about World War II? I wonder what a pacifist alternative would be. I wonder if violence IS necessary, or rather the idea of it’s necessity simply a construction of our society.

    That said, I don’t think violence can ever be justified. I don’t trust reason, and I don’t trust thought – at least not as much as I trust action. But maybe sometimes we have to do bad things, live with, and admit it. The idealist in me would love to believe in a completely pacifist state, but the realist in me cannot even conceive of a world without governance – and in order for government to work, it requires laws and consequence; both of which lead to violence and force.

    Then again maybe I am just giving into common conception. Maybe total peace is possible if we only we could believe in it. But, the truth is, I can’t even imagine it! I mean, I can – but I can’t. Do you know what I mean? It’s like God or heaven. I’m going to take a look at that book you mentioned – by peaceful society did you mean totally peaceful? I guess it depends on one’s definition of violence too. Either way, just the idea of that is incredible to me, maybe it is possible, and maybe I can promote it through my actions and my art.

    ” Peaceably if we can, forcibly if we must.”

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <pre> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


 

April 2008
M T W T F S S
« Mar   May »
 123456
78910111213
14151617181920
21222324252627
282930  

estats

Categories

album of the week diva 200 links movies opinion personal life Uncategorized World News youtube

Meta

Blogroll

Recent Comments

chinese astrology on The Importance of Being E…
ericsanpablo on The Importance of Being E…
kevinhubbard on The Importance of Being E…
ericsanpablo on Entertainment
webdiva on Entertainment

Tags

album of the week art astrology belief blog calvin and hobbes children choice compilation computers culture destiny difference diva 200 Ericsson San Pablo Chu fear film food funny happiness happy horoscope ideology ignorance internet loss mobility game money movie movie review movies music opinion playlist poverty question review school society statistics technology thoughts vancouver violence violence in film

Archives