Moonlit_Angel
Blue Crack Addict
Irvine511 said:
okay, this drives me a little nuts. here's why.
it is NOT entertainment's job to tell us how to live. it is not entertainment's job to give us pat little stories that affirm what we already believe. it is not entertainment's job to present us with wholesome characters who make decisions that we would make. just because there is violence in a film does not mean that, 1) it's an endorsement of violence, or 2) that the movie is there telling you what decisions you should make.
("Million Dollar Baby" spoiler alert; though probably everyone knows the twist by now)
one thing that has been driving me crazy of late was the campaign orchestrated by right wing movie critic Michael Medved hand-in-hand with Rush Limbaugh. Medved gives away a crucial plot twist in order to state that the film is a pro-euthenasia piece -- and by giving away that plot twist, there's no question that it damaged the film at the Box Office since much of the surprise of the film rides on that. firstly, who cares if it's pro-euthanasia? it has every right to be, should it choose to be, and so long as the topic is presented in a toughtful, adult manner (which it is in the film), what is the problem? why are we so resistant to the presentation of things we don't agree with? why do we have to have our own moral code affirmed each and every time we go to the movies!?!?!
drives me crazy.
characters in movies do not always do what we would do. ometimes they offend us, and that is their right. It is our right to disagree with them. It is not our right, however, to destroy for others the experience of being as surprised by those choices as we were. Eastwood and Swank's characters perform in ways that is entirely consistent with who they are. that is one hallmark of great filmmaking: characters are logically and truthfully followed to their limits, and if you care about the characters (as i did), they force you to think about the decisions they make. if you leave a movie and discuss what should have been done, what you would have done, and what you would wish for your loved ones, then the movie has served a purpose, whether you agree with it or not. a movie is not good or bad because of its content, but because of how it handles its content, whether it's with violence or euthanasia or abortion or whatever contentious issue.
the film was called pro-Nazi, because the Nazis believed in euthanasia. to me, the real totalitarian thing would be a world of movies where everyone in them had to do what we thought they should do.
(end of rant)
.
Thank. You. You put that in much better words than I could...I, too, get bugged when people blame the media for violence in this country. I've watched violent movies throughout my life, and yet I'm not a violent person. And I'm not a violent person because my parents raised me right and taught me that that was the wrong way to handle things.
Angela