Entertainment

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?

Rikey Mikey Choke a Likey

“What you do speaks so loud that I cannot hear what you say.” -Ralph Waldo Emerson

Here is a video I watched which basically seeks to share statistics regarding pornography on the Internet in a fun way.  What is interesting is that the video’s method of showing itself borders on pornography!  I am not sure whether the video was made to combat pornography or simply as a tongue in cheek project… but if it was made to question pornography, I wonder whether such a method is affective. 

A part of me admires the idea of a pornographic movie that could question the very medium it employs… but a part of me also says, wait – Can a pornographic movie or a violent movie or a sexist movie or a racist movie, even if made as a satirical, ironical gesture, really serve any other purpose than to inevitably further what it questions in a roundabout way?  I realize that such things intend to shock us, the viewer, into realization… but what happens when such shock wears?  Where do we draw the line?  The proliferation of such into the imagination of the whole….it seems a devolution.  We are constantly affected by what we see, whether we like it or not…. think about cigarettes in cinema for example….even if I put a cigarette into the hands of the most despicable character, even if I show him dying in grotesque manner, the cigarette is still glorified in some manner…. and so it is with the gun or the abusive or the discriminatory.  Even if I film or show the most atrocious act, in some manner, the filming of it, if done well, makes it beautiful…. and I think sometimes there is a  subconscious transference.  So perhaps the answer is to make a truly bad movie about bad things… but then no one will watch it!

at the same time, I realize flaws in my logic… I understand the other side… and, almost absurdly, it makes just as much sense! Maybe more!  Its funny…..there is so much information… and everything can be made to seem feasible… and because of this, it seems I’m often paralyzed into inaction; really, it is a brilliant form of control, that gives the controlled the pretense of control through the facade of knowledge…. to think too much, and do too little.

“The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be.” -Socrates

 

“Thunder Cats are Go!”

    I just came back from watching “Juno,” and I have to say, without hesitation, it is MY favorite movie this year (and last).  The movie feels like an old friend, I can’t put it any other way.  I laughed, I cried (nearly), and it just felt, well, good.  I related to the humor, I related to the situations, everything just felt right; childish, irreverent, but irrevocably meaningful.  Yes, I could see how parts could be considered borderline cheese ball, but, really, that’s part of the charm.  In this sense, it reminds me of another one of my favorite films, “Before Sunrise,” in that the movie is aware of its adolescence, but runs with it.  And I like that playfulness, that childishness. I also love Kimya Dawson, who, coincidentally, is featured in the soundtrack, so that didn’t hurt.  Anyhow, if you’ve watched this movie, and also liked it, I’d maybe  recommend “King of California,” which is also good.

Juno: “Yeah, I’m a legend. You know. They call me the cautionary whale.”

    That said, I admit, some of the devices used were contrived, and the movie itself isn’t actually unique or groundbreaking.  If someone said “hey, that’s not the best movie of the year,” I wouldn’t disagree.  It’s not the best made movie of the year, or the best told, or the most “different,” it will not revolutionize film.  Were “No Country for Old Men” or “Sunshine” technically better? Will they be remembered more ten years from now?  In respect to the world as a whole, sure.  Did “Babel” and perhaps “Bamako” have more to say?  Yes.  Were “Atonement” and “Across the Universe” more visually pleasing? Of course.  Was “Zodiac” more intriguing?  Yup.   But I watch “Juno,” and, to be quite frank, I just don’t care. I will remember it more.  The movie just makes me feel good through and through, for no particular reason, I can’t explain it.  It’s super corny to say, but I’ll say it, because it makes sense in the context of the movie, it’s like love, none of that matters.   Juno is the best movie of the year.  Watch it.