"Come on, it wasn't that bad."

[ScottotD]

Yeah,  I do find the knee-jerk 'reports' about thedisturbing new phenonenon hilariously pathetic and un-researched since graphic horror movies have been around for decades.  Although having people say you're a potentional killer or sociopath as if it were fact instead of a rather sheltered opinion wears thin after the first 50 or so times.

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

Yeah,  I do find the knee-jerk 'reports' about thedisturbing new phenonenon hilariously pathetic and un-researched since graphic horror movies have been around for decades.  Although having people say you're a potentional killer or sociopath as if it were fact instead of a rather sheltered opinion wears thin after the first 50 or so times.

Most intelligent people understand that a movie never made anyone do anything.  If that were the case something like Franco Zeffirelli's Jesus of Nazareth would be mandatory viewing since it would make everyone love and care for one another immediately.

But there are people who are already prone to doing this stuff - and might have already done such things - would do it even if the movies didn't exist.  They would be the first ones there to see this because iit's what they're interested in.

We, as a society, like to think that these kinds of people are small in number.

The fact that these movies get so many viewers make people nervous that those numbers are much larger than we think.

Does that make sense?

[Phantom of Krankor]

My pick that I absolutely love, that no one else seems too is Death to Smoochy.

Smoochy is a great dark comedy but it's not for everyone.  Edward Norton and Robin Williams are both fantastic in it.

Agreed there.  Took me awhile to see it, but once I gave it a shot I was very glad I did.  Love that movie, need to pick up my own copy of it soon.

Death to Smoochy is a criminally underrated film. Not only did I think it was hilarious, but it had a really original and different story and concept.

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

Death to Smoochy is a criminally underrated film. Not only did I think it was hilarious, but it had a really original and different story and concept.

Can't agree, sorry.   The basic concept was one thing.  That could have been brilliant.

But then they started with the Rainbow Randy as a self-hating homosexual stuff....and the whole Irish Mafia nonsense just to set up the dim-witted son to end up dead in the Smoochy costume.

It was like the script was suppose to be a rip on the television networks but the studio wouldn't let them so they had to come up with anything.

I tcould have been funny and dark without going there.

[Doc Steve]

Yeah,  I do find the knee-jerk 'reports' about thedisturbing new phenonenon hilariously pathetic and un-researched since graphic horror movies have been around for decades.  Although having people say you're a potentional killer or sociopath as if it were fact instead of a rather sheltered opinion wears thin after the first 50 or so times.

Most intelligent people understand that a movie never made anyone do anything.  If that were the case something like Franco Zeffirelli's Jesus of Nazareth would be mandatory viewing since it would make everyone love and care for one another immediately.

But there are people who are already prone to doing this stuff - and might have already done such things - would do it even if the movies didn't exist.  They would be the first ones there to see this because iit's what they're interested in.

We, as a society, like to think that these kinds of people are small in number.

The fact that these movies get so many viewers make people nervous that those numbers are much larger than we think.

Does that make sense?

Yes.  However, here's my take on it.  I'll use the example of gun violence. 

Does violence on television promote gun violence in real life?  IMHO, no it does not.  That is, viewing gun violence on television does not make a person any more or less likely to shoot someone.  However, I do believe that it is possible that film and television may impact our behavior in more subtle ways.

For example, I am a gun nut.  My father used to be a D.I. for advanced infantry training (Vietnam era).  I grew up understanding how firearms work.  In my case, television has had little impact on me.  I am more likely to see and comment on all of the inaccuracies than anything else.  On the other hand, most people don't know that a semi-automatic pistol has to load the first cartridge by the manual action of the slide (usually racking the slide or dropping it on a loaded magazine).  Since television shows constantly show people racking the slides of pistols, most people eventually do figure this out for themselves. 

What if films and television never depicted this?  My guess is that there would be a significantly lower number of people who understood how a semi-auto pistol operates.  Does this lead to more violence?  Probably not, but it might change the character or method of a violent attack. 

Similarly, I have also wondered if shows like CSI, NCIS, and the like actually assist crime by reminding people to be careful with leaving evidence at a crime scene.   Again, I don't think they contribute to the causes of crime, but they may influence the commission of actual crimes by encouraging better precautions. 

Just a thought...

[CM916]

I enjoyed House of the Dead in the theater going into it with proper expecations of a ridiculous video game movie with zombies.

[RobtheBarbarian]

Similarly, I have also wondered if shows like CSI, NCIS, and the like actually assist crime by reminding people to be careful with leaving evidence at a crime scene.   Again, I don't think they contribute to the causes of crime, but they may influence the commission of actual crimes by encouraging better precautions. 

I've heard it makes things harder for prosecutors because it gives people stupid preconceptions about how criminal investigation works and makes people expect 100% certainty with things like DNA evidence.

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

Similarly, I have also wondered if shows like CSI, NCIS, and the like actually assist crime by reminding people to be careful with leaving evidence at a crime scene.   Again, I don't think they contribute to the causes of crime, but they may influence the commission of actual crimes by encouraging better precautions. 

I've heard it makes things harder for prosecutors because it gives people stupid preconceptions about how criminal investigation works and makes people expect 100% certainty with things like DNA evidence.

Serial killers have been using bleach long before those shows came into being (Danny Rolling in Gainesville, FL 1990, for instance).

I wonder how many pre-meditatied killers are instead put off attempting their crimes when they find out how many options are cut off from them these days - unless you can afford the right lawyer after the fact.

[bratpop]

The news tells you how to do crime far more than any cop show does.

However, a guy my dad worked with almost tasted cocaine to check if it was real because he saw it on TV.

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

The news tells you how to do crime far more than any cop show does.

However, a guy my dad worked with almost tasted cocaine to check if it was real because he saw it on TV.

Gee, they did it in Soultaker - you mean that doesn't work?   

[bratpop]

No, and apparently you don't really get taken to Heaven by Martin Sheen's brother either.

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

Well, that's something to look forward to.

[Darth Geek]

Speeking of Martin Sheen:

Spawn.
While it isn't a good movie as a whole by any means, Lequizamo as the Clown is awesome. He really steals the show here. It's the reason I became a fan of his.
The Spawn suit was cool, and a good page to film character translation (at least until they added some of the questionable CGI)
Violator done as a physical effect (even partially) was great, too bad he didn't do much besides pushing Spawn against a few walls.
I don't blame Michael Jai White too much, as he wasn't given much to do.
The less said about Priest the better, though (aside from the fact she was hot).

[Plastic Self-Cleaning Duck]

Speeking of Martin Sheen:

Spawn.
While it isn't a good movie as a whole by any means, Lequizamo as the Clown is awesome. He really steals the show here. It's the reason I became a fan of his.
The Spawn suit was cool, and a good page to film character translation (at least until they added some of the questionable CGI)
Violator done as a physical effect (even partially) was great, too bad he didn't do much besides pushing Spawn against a few walls.
I don't blame Michael Jai White too much, as he wasn't given much to do.
The less said about Priest the better, though (aside from the fact she was hot).

I will second that.

[Doc Steve]

I'm gonna stand by "Yes, it absolutely was that bad" on Spawn.  I think it's still the worst movie I've ever paid to see theatrically, and I'm including Dungeons and Dragons in that list.

Those are up there, but I actually went to see Highlander II on opening night.  Back then, there wasn't much in the way of pre-release reviews.  We had no idea how bad it would truly be.