Have you seen the Korean movie Old Boy???

[jcrew2001]

Because The VaTech shooter seemed to carry out the plot of the movie and pose for pictures with the hammer just like in the movie; from what I've read in the NYT.

We should just ban violent movies - too many crazy people watch them and act them out.

One of Cho's plays describes throwing chainsaws - this was exactly a scene from the movie "American Psycho" where Christian Bale throws a chainsaw down a stairway.

[Starbucks Anarchist]

1. Forget your sarcasm icon?

[OwnedByFerrets]

2. Ban violent movies???

Censorship much??

[fidgeting wildly]

3. You forgot your sarcasm smiley, right?

RIGHT?!?

[Atman]

4. Quentin Tarantino wanted it to win the Cannes Film Festival top honor

No kidding, no sarcasm icon. Reported on the news this morning. As it is, it still won some other lesser award at Cannes, but the guy definitely was into acting out movie roles, and Old Boy was apparently one of his faves. And Quentin's, who is arguably a pretty sick fuck in his own right.

.

[Donnachaidh]

6. Tarantino is a one-note sick puppy

If ever there is a posterchild for obsessions with violence, it should be him.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

19. You know who I think is really sick and disgusting?

People who blame violent movies for violent behaviour.

What a bunch of perverts.

[blm]

5. Yes - but are there casting directors crapping their pants during every AUDITION

in fear of crazy actresses, too?

Where do you stop?

My schizophrenic sister's domain is religion and she starts acting like the furthest right street-corner preacher you ever heard who would 'smite' every sinner who got in her way.

Many schizophrenics react in extreme ways to far right interpretations of the Bible.

Should we ban fundamentalist religions?

[Pyrzqxgl]

21. We'd all live a little easier if we did.

[blm]

37. No doubt about it - but will fundamentalist religions BE outlawed?

Nope.

[porphyrian]

7. Old Boy is an excellent movie, but it has little to do with this kid.

The main character of the movie is kidnapped on his way home and imprisoned by unknown people in an apartment for fifteen years, after which he seeks revenge on whoever is responsible.

Movies, music, video games, etc. DO NOT make people go on rampage killings. Untreated (and often undiagnosed) MENTAL ILLNESS makes people go on rampage killings. Until we admit and address the actual problem, we only make things worse.

[Forrest Greene]

9. I Agree With You That

...the main issue for this shooter was untreated mental illness, the difficulty of obtaining treatment, the stigma attached.

But please consider that the multi-million dollar advertising industry exists & thrives precisely because movies, music, video games, etc., do, in fact, influence people.

[porphyrian]

12. No, advertising influences people.

The media they infect with it (movies, video games, music, whatever) are not the problem. Stop enabling the witch hunts. Focus.

[Atman]

13. Thank you! I'm tired of people denying movies and tv don't influence behavior

Why do you think Listerine ads are repeated thirty times a day? Why is advertising pasted on EVERYTHING we see? Why does the government make propaganda films? Why do advertisers clamor to place their products into movie scenes? BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE INFLUENCED BY THIS SORT OF STUFF. We want to call it "marketing" when it's pushing mouthwash or new cars, but it's just entertainment when we pay nine bucks to see it on a big screen.

.

[porphyrian]

16. Again, advertising is the problem, not the media conveying it.

The problem with not making the distinction is in who gets hurt by your witch hunt.

[Atman]

23. MY witch hunt?

I'm not hunting any witches. I made an observation about what marketing and advertising is all about. I feel I'm qualified to do that, having been in the business for nearly 30 years.

You are attempting to make a distinction without a difference. Who the hell cares what media is used to influence people...a "movie" is just an advertisement for the director's visions, ideas and observations.

.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

24. Sounds like a witch hunt to me.

Blaming violence on violent movies strikes me as about as intelligent on blaming devil possession on why the farmer's daughter has a swollen belly and keeps vomiting in the morning.

[Atman]

26. But I didn't "blame" violence on violent movies, did I?

Violence happened before movies, as far as I can tell. Just try to read my words and not conflate them into what YOU want them to mean. I merely made the observation that it is ludicrous to acknowledge that repeated exposure to advertising can influence behavior, but repeated exposure to other media content does not. Why is that so hard to grasp?

.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

27. Yeah, you pretty much did.

You claimed violent movies influence behaviour, and called a filmmaker a "pretty sick fuck" because of his violent movies.

If you want to spin it some other way, that's fine, just don't pretend I'm the one with the comprehension problem.

[Atman]

30. No, you're wrong.

I said MOVIES CAN influence behavior. Do you deny this?

And I did say Tarantino is a pretty sick fuck. What does that have to do with you "blame" nonsense? Are you offended that I don't particularly like his type of movies? Sorry, I don't. Just as some don't particularly like Woody Allen movies or M. Knight Shamalyan movies.

Old Boy was a heavy favorite of Tarantion's for the Grand Palm award (or whatever they call it) at Cannes. I said I think Tarantino is a sick fuck in his own right. What the hell does that have to do with me "blaming" violence on movies? Stay focused, dude. If you like slasher films, great, that's your bag. Enjoy it. And in the meantime try to find me ONE post wherein I've EVER advocated any sort of censorship of this sort of stuff. I'm pretty much a free expression absolutist in this area. You're simply taking a lot of bullshit from my posts that I just never said.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. LOL. This is rich stuff.

I guess you can say you "do not recall" blaming violence on movies.

There's been a lot of that going around recently.

[BurtWorm]

32. Not a comprehension problem, just a logic problem.

It's possible to think violent movies influence behavior without thinking they *cause* violence. It's also possible that some artists enjoy being called "pretty sick fucks." Especially ones who make extreme horror movies. But that doesn't mean they are fully responsible for the effect their movies have on their audience. It has yet to be conclusively established, as far as I know, whether violent imagery "causes" violence. More likely it merely influences already violence-prone viewers.

It seems naive to me to claim that violent movies have no effect other than purely aesthetic one on their audiences. This view, while pretending to be in defense of art or cinema or freedom of expression or whatever, actually denigrates all of the above by denying their power to move those on the receiving end of art, cinema, speech, etc. That sort of view, it seems to me, becomes mindlessly reflexive after a while and more at the service of shutting down thought, ironically enough, than furthering it.

[Atman]

34. Thanks. These guys can't differentiate "blame" and "influence."

Good post.

.

[porphyrian]

49. You can say my name. I won't report you. - n/t

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

35. What are they iinfluencing, then, if not violence?

Listerine sales?

Come on, the OP said violent movies should be banned, referring to the VT shooting, this guy chimes in on how violent movies influence behaviour, and people who make violent movies are sick fucks.

It strikes me as naive and denigrating to pretend that art causes anything. It's the same scapegoating bullshit we saw with Imus and rap music. It's the same thinking behind censorship, it's immoral, and it's the equivalent of accusing Harry Potter books of witchcraft.

[BurtWorm]

39. If you say so. I can see your mind is firmly made up about this.

But I think Atman and I are talking about some other effects of art.

You seem to be wanting people who disagree with you to be taking black-and-white positions you can easily dispatch, but I, at least, am finding it difficult to oblige you.

[porphyrian]

25. Are you blaming advertising or movies/video games/etc.?

The former is the problem. The latter is creative expression. When you fail to understand or make that distinction, who do you think takes the hit? Advertising surely doesn't seem to be hurting at all.

You should know that. You've been in the business for nearly 30 years.

[Atman]

28. I'm "blaming" neither.

I'll state it again...you cannot say that ONLY advertising influences behavior, while other media does not. Did "An Inconvenient Truth" influence anyone's behavior? Be honest now...did NO ONE sit back and think, "Wow, I've got to do something!" But you insist on couching what I'm saying in "blame." I'm not "blaming" anything. I'm making an observation based upon experience; if directors AS WELL AS advertisers didn't think their creative product would have an affect on people, they simply wouldn't create the stuff. There would be no point. As an artist, too, while I paint and draw for the sheer love of it, I alway hope that my work will have some sort of impact on the viewer. Again, stop focusing on the word "blame." I never used it, you did.

.

[porphyrian]

29. Hemorrhoids flaring up today?

There is a giant difference between the influence of advertising, which can convince someone to buy shit they don't need, and an entertainment form such as a movie, which rarely influences people to anything more than an animated conversation on their walk back to their car. You know better, and you're misrepresenting the truth. I thought you've worked in advertising for 30 years. Or are you trying sell your bullshit now?

[Atman]

33. This is pointless.

You and the other poster seem to be busting balls just for sport. You're both conflating my posts and adding stuff I never said. Seriously...call me names, say I have hemorrhoids, whatever makes you think you've "won" something. I have nothing further to add if you're going to pull this shit.

.

[CJCRANE]

40. You make some good points.

Of course movies influence people.

After I watched Highlander I bought a trenchcoat, I bought some black Nikes the same as John Connor wears in Terminator, I took up kung fu (briefly) after I watched the Matrix. After watching I, Robot I wanted to drive an Audi...

(Yes, I'm the demographic that product placement is aimed at! )

[porphyrian]

42. Yeah, thanks for disregarding my valid point as meaningless.

And you were the one who jumped in with the "I'm tired of people denying movies and tv influence behavior" bit of drivel. If you can't or won't defend your position, tough shit. Maybe you can use your 30 years of advertising experience to convince yourself you feel better.

[BurtWorm]

41. Did Triumph of the Will or Olympiad inspire nothing more than conversation?

Is art really the wimpy weakling you and bornaginhooligan are trying to make us believe it is? I think you'd find a lot of artists strongly disagreeing with you.

[porphyrian]

43. Again, it's not the same thing.

Art can be life-changing, but it doesn't make a mass murderer out of an English student. However, advertising can make people buy and ingest poison until they die from it. Big fucking difference, and I'm sick of people equating the two.

[BurtWorm]

45. People are equating the two in your imagination.

Were you just watching an ad or something? ;)

Seriously, where is the line between art and advertising exactly?

[porphyrian]

46. How do you know what's happening in my imagination...?

The advertising industry has been trying to blur the line my entire life, probably longer but not on today's scale. If you can't tell the difference, that's by design. However, when the mob shows up with their torches and pitchforks to stop the madness, who do you think gets burned at the stake? And, yes, that is metaphor. Now, anyway.

[BurtWorm]

47. Are you afraid that Old Boy might not be available at your video store because of this?

I personally don't think it's in danger. I think society is strong enough to endure whatever "evil" violent movies have to offer.

And for the record, though I haven't seen it, I've been reading about it and I don't believe it's a threat to society the way semi-automatic weapons or sarin gas are--not by a very long shot. I wouldn't want to see it (or any other film like it) banned or publicly villified.

At the same time, I do not take for granted that violence in films is innocent. I don't see a stark line between advertising and movies (though of course, I can tell most ads apart from most movies). A lot of movies are made to sell something. Some ads become as iconic as some art.

All I am saying is that the subject is vastly more complicated than you and the OP (on opposite sides) seem to think it is.

[Forrest Greene]

50. Please Keep In Mind

...that the stories & shows only exist to keep the ads from bumping into one another.

[kenny blankenship]

14. In Old Boy, the pursuit of vengeance turns against the pursuer

Crazy Cho missed that part; and not so surprisingly, since he was crazy. For Cho, Oh Dae Su's story of suffering and hatred became something to act out instead of something to learn from and avoid.
Crazy people will always produce their own meanings for cultural artifacts and will cling to them, even when their preferred meanings are so arbitrary as to be opposed to the intentions of the artifact's creator. (This is different from deconstructive reading, but I'll let some deconstructionist explain why in the event someone demands to know.)

[kenny blankenship]

15. Cho also explicitly compared himself to Jesus in his video (reportedly)

so I guess we should ban the Bible too, if we're going to be cracking down on violent works of art. Crazy people so often seem to take inspiration from it. Cho is just a recent avatar in a long line of violent nutcases--Jim Jones, David Koresh, Mel Gibson-- who saw themselves in the Bible and decided to enact a fantasy of Biblical all-out good vs. evil vengeance.

[porphyrian]

20. Exactly. That message is even more clear in the second movie of the "trilogy."

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance, I believe it's called.

[frylock]

8. not yet, but i'll be watching it this weekend..

it's been on my list for awhile. BTW... fuck the NYT.

[formerrepuke]

10. I dunno, but here are pics for comparison:

'Old Boy' (2003)

[movie_girl99]

11. the guy in the movie was kidnapped and held for 15 years

I havent heard anything like that about this kid.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

17. He also posed like Robert Deniro in "Taxi Driver"

Maybe we should ban Koreans.

:shrug:

[ends_dont_justify]

18. We should ban opinions, because they spark contreversy which ignited killing sprees

Oh wait, that's completely ridiculous!

:sarcasm:

[lectrobyte]

22. Does it feauture Collective Soul's "Shine" ?

[orleans]

36. ban violent movies? yeah, that'll happen. n/t

[BlooInBloo]

38. I see your post's stupidity, and raise you:

The film didn't kill anyone - the Korean kid did. Ergo, we should ban Koreans.

:rofl:

[jeffrey_X]

44. Great flick...not sure how it applies to this kid.

What if he were Canadian and did the exact same thing? You would have never mentioned this movie.

[jcrew2001]

48. It was a korean movie and he spoke korean

of course reading subtitles or dubbing could have "brainwashed" a canadian/american - but this kid was obsessed with this movie.