MCN Blogs
David Poland

By David Poland poland@moviecitynews.com

Posted Monday, September 26th, 2005 - 17 Comments »

Can You Discuss Violence Seriously & Show It At the Same Time?

The Hot Button today

17 Comments »

17 Responses to “Can You Discuss Violence Seriously & Show It At the Same Time?”

  1. Angelus21 says:
    September 27, 2005 at 2:40 am

    Violence is a part of life. You can definately talk about it and show it.

  2. Joe Leydon says:
    September 27, 2005 at 4:05 am

    Francois Truffaut once stated that he genuinely believed there could never really be an anti-war film, because as soon as you film something — like violence — you somehow, by the very act of chosing to film it, indicate approval of it. I don’t entirely agree, but there IS a very fine line between responsible dramatization and inadvertent (or deliberate) exploitation.

  3. Angelus21 says:
    September 27, 2005 at 4:31 am

    Look at video games. Some of those new ones are ridiculous. Shooting cops? Pimping out ho’s? Fun to play? Sure. But responsible? No.

  4. jeffmcm says:
    September 27, 2005 at 6:52 am

    To elaborate on Mr. Leydon said, the more elaborate violence in an anti-violence movie like Fight Club or Clockwork Orange or Saving Private Ryan, the more thrilling the artistry is and therefore the experience becomes enjoyable. It’s a bizarre paradox but I still believe that a depiction of something horrible can hold more value than to avoid the debate altogether.

  5. KamikazeCamelV2.0 says:
    September 27, 2005 at 8:44 am

    Aww, you mentioned one of my all-time faves, All That Jazz.
    I am happy now.
    Anyway.
    What do people expect? A movie about violence that just has people sitting around discussing violence?
    …? Man, that’d be thrilling, non?

  6. Bruce says:
    September 27, 2005 at 1:31 pm

    Who doesn’t want to see some all out violence sometimes? That’s what movies are. Escapism. And sometimes a violent movie is enjoyable to watch. I am old enough not to want to see a message when I see something.

  7. jeffmcm says:
    September 27, 2005 at 6:26 pm

    So the question of whether movies should confront an issue is irrelevant to Bruce?
    I think that ‘messages’ as you put it are equally repellent no matter your age. Unless you’re really old, on the verge of death.

  8. Bruce says:
    September 27, 2005 at 6:47 pm

    Jeffrey all issues are irrelevant to me. I just want to be entertained. I don’t need to be preached at by filmmakers that don’t have half a clue what they’re talking about anyway. Unless you count violence as being Dungeons and Dragons.

  9. jeffmcm says:
    September 27, 2005 at 7:03 pm

    Cool! Good to know. Someone will be in to rape your wife and burn your house later today.

  10. Josh says:
    September 27, 2005 at 7:59 pm

    If we didn’t have liberal laws we wouldn’t have to worry about rapists and murderers and child molestors and gangs. But you can always rehabilitate these people right, jeff???? They deserve six, seven, eight chances at life. Open your hearts.

  11. jeffmcm says:
    September 27, 2005 at 8:22 pm

    Huh? All I know is, Bruce is complacent. Don’t bother him.

  12. Mark Ziegler says:
    September 27, 2005 at 11:45 pm

    Jeff wants to rape women and burn down houses. Thats Liberal compassion.

  13. jeffmcm says:
    September 27, 2005 at 11:48 pm

    Yes. That is exactly what I meant.

  14. Mark Ziegler says:
    September 27, 2005 at 11:59 pm

    This is what happens when you don’t have faith and values. You end up like Jeff here.

  15. jeffmcm says:
    September 28, 2005 at 12:26 am

    I have faith in you, Mark. You never disappoint.

  16. joefitz84 says:
    September 28, 2005 at 12:38 am

    Watch out, Mark. He may try to rape you and then blame “society”.

  17. Sanchez says:
    September 28, 2005 at 1:06 am

    Jeff is known to like long distance shots because hes too scared to get in close and get the kill. He’s yellow.

Leave a Reply

The Hot Blog

Comments Most Recent Archives

Keil S. on: Don Draper: Critic

Joe Leydon on: Don Draper: Critic

Keil S. on: Don Draper: Critic

christian on: Don Draper: Critic

movieman on: Don Draper: Critic

movieman on: Don Draper: Critic

palmtree on: Don Draper: Critic

Foamy Squirrel on: Don Draper: Critic

leahnz on: Don Draper: Critic

hcat on: Don Draper: Critic

Quote Unquotesee all »

“I don’t really think, Sean, that you need to know about my various sexual liaisons. Or that anyone else needs to. I did write about them. I filled a hundred pages of Moleskine notebooks with my one-night stands, my affairs. But I decided they didn’t belong in a professional memoir. First of all, these are real people we’re talking about. Many of them were enjoyable. Some were abject failures. My wife said to me when she read the pages, ‘Of what purpose is this in a memoir? Of what purpose is this other than to titillate?’ The point is, I never see them. It’s because I have nothing in common with them, frankly. And probably didn’t at the time. I could not provide a sensible reason why I married these women. The thing is, in the case of my marriages, it takes two people to fuck up a marriage. It wasn’t simply the fault of these women that I lost interest in them and realised they were insignificant relationships. Which is how I look at them right now–as being insignificant. I see them as blips.”
~ William Friedkin On Cutting Interviewers Off At The Sass

“I have to imagine from Mr. Spielberg’s point of view, the paradigm shift in the 1970s was just the new “normal,” a “halcyon era” from which we are straying in the 21st century–because theatrical exhibition is tenuous (as it has been since the 1940s), the home video market has dried up and people are watching pirated movies on their phone. Spielberg’s coming-of-age era was for him the halcyon period that the 21st century “implosion” will cause to go “crashing into the ground.” But he is wrong. The market for movies is actually diverse and highly segmented–although from the top-down movie industry vantage point and media punditry you would not think this to be true.  Would we really mourn for Mr. Spielberg or ourselves if Lincoln would have been made for cable or had played on public television?  Is it bad for humanity that cable television is creating wonderful, resonant stories in long-form series that people want to watch at home on TV (or streamed onto their computer)? I don’t think so, but it is a paradigm shift and it might affect people’s theatrical moviegoing habits. Televisions in people’s homes have had that effect for seven decades–it is not a new phenomenon. As Art House cinema impresarios we need to focus on what WE can do at our theaters and in our communities. It is not productive for us to fret over what pundits say or about what well-meaning filmmakers like the Stevens–Spielberg and Soderbergh–say. We should fret about what we can do in our communities. What we can do to support filmmakers.”
~ From A Response By Russ Collins, CEO, Michigan Theater – Ann Arbor And Director, Art House Convergence, To Mr. Spielberg