Grindhouse

[MarkAndrew]

Why am I missing the point? you and sarcasm seem to be trying to back up your opinion with the suggestion that violent films are 'bad' because they could perhaps effect people's mental state adversely.  I'm suggesting that if someone's that weak mentally then there's no telling what could set them off

Sweeping statements like "this is bad for society" and this "shouldn't be shown" makes it seem like you're submitting you personal taste as fact, I'm not trying to win points.

And yes, although it's off topic, in broad terms I do think that adults should have access to to basically any form of entertainment they choose (entertainment not reality, willing participants, safety, etc) although what makes someone an adult, etc makes the idea more complicated.  I can't, off the top of my head think of any ideas that shouldn't be availiable.

Well at least you're restricting it to adults.  :-)

I think you might be over generalizing, you say if someone is mentally unbalanced that anything can set them off.  Fair enough, but I'm not concerned about edge cases like that.  That scenario isn't going to encompass very many people.  My thought is that you don't have to be mentally unbalanced for to have feeling and actions to be influenced by the movies you see.  And that as movies ratchet up the amount of violence, gore and cruelty, that behavior creeps up the ladder of what is imaginable, what is entertaining and what is imitable.  And it effects a wider audience than just the crazies.

[MarkAndrew]

How can you convey to an impressionable mind that an idea is bad, if you can't convey the idea itself? It would be like saying, "Son, don't sin." "What's a sin, daddy?" "Something you should not do."

I'm referring to these idea of these actions being acceptable, not it's existence.  I think violence is very appropriate when it shows the consequences of dangerous activity, like shooting people, crashing a car, bombing a factory.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

Why am I missing the point? you and sarcasm seem to be trying to back up your opinion with the suggestion that violent films are 'bad' because they could perhaps effect people's mental state adversely.  I'm suggesting that if someone's that weak mentally then there's no telling what could set them off

Im confused at how you thought changing my statement of SOME things. into a bizaar statement of absolution.  If you think there are no ideas what so ever worth stopping or censoring, then you have admit your morally ok with genocide, racism, and pedophilia, its that simple.  There is a line the only question is where is it. 

[Sharktopus]

Why am I missing the point? you and sarcasm seem to be trying to back up your opinion with the suggestion that violent films are 'bad' because they could perhaps effect people's mental state adversely.  I'm suggesting that if someone's that weak mentally then there's no telling what could set them off

Im confused at how you thought changing my statement of SOME things. into a bizaar statement of absolution.  If you think there are no ideas what so ever worth stopping or censoring, then you have admit your morally ok with  its that simple.  There is a line the only question is where is it. 

Genocide, racism, and pedophilia are not ideas, they're actions. Portraying them in a fictional manner is not the same as condoning them, and acting like they don't exist won't make them go away. When people make the argument that portraying bad things in movies leads to desensitization, I suspect that those people really just don't want to be reminded that those bad things exist.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

a weird way to look at it.  especially as they are the known results of ideas

racial cleansing=genocide
nazism=racism
Nambla creedo= pedophilia

[torgosPizza]

Racism is an idea just as much as it is a belief that someone with a different color skin than yours is inferior.

Genocide is an action, the "-cide" suffix portrays that.

And sarcasm I think you have it backwards, I don't think nazism CAUSED racism. A person who is jewish is not a "different race" in the usual sense, but anti-semitism is often lumped into the racism category, when it's really a persecution based on religious belief. Although Nazis may have thrown you in camps just for "looking" Jewish.

I think nazism may have included a type of "religious racism" as part of its ideologies but I don't agree that one caused the other.

You all bring up valid points such as desensitization and escalation of what is acceptable versus what should be condemned. But I think that kind of thing is, again, like nailing Jell-O to a tree. It's tough to generalize about an argument like this, whereas it's been shown in studies that compared to the total amount of people who were exposed to violent video games or movies, the number of people who go nuts is miniscule.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

your right torgo.  i was just trying to show that they were concepts though.  My point is ultimately that some ideas are bad ideas, those three being the biggest ones i could think of at the moment, and that they ought to be shunned whenever someone tries to champained those concepts.

[Sharktopus]

a weird way to look at it.  especially as they are the known results of ideas

racial cleansing=genocide
nazism=racism
Nambla creedo= pedophilia

Everything is the result of ideas. Many good things happen for the wrong reasons and many bad things happend with the best intentions. Anyway, the point I was trying to make is that you can't censor thought, and that's what censoring movies, TV, video games, comics, whatever, boils down to. It makes the assumption that people are incapable of recognizing "wrong actions" in fiction, so we have to be shielded from it.

nailing Jell-O to a tree.

I'm stealing that analogy.

Once again, torgosPizza is the lone voice of reason cutting through the din.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

. It makes the assumption that people are incapable of recognizing "wrong actions" in fiction, so we have to be shielded from it.

but we know that people cant reconize wrong actions in the REAL world aka crime, why would the fictional world be any different?

[Sharktopus]

So, if Joe Bankrobber had never seen the movie "Guy Robs A Bank" he wouldn't rob banks in real life?

[J-Proof]

I think we're all missing a valid point here - Grindhouse is gonna kick ass, so we should all go see it....

[Sharktopus]

I think we're all missing a valid point here - Grindhouse is gonna kick ass, so we should all go see it....

EXACTLY

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

So, if Joe Bankrobber had never seen the movie "Guy Robs A Bank" he wouldn't rob banks in real life?

Im not implying anything of the kind.  Im merely stating that to say NO ONE is confused or affected by what they see is as lunatic as saying EVERYONE is effected by what they see.

I think we're all missing a valid point here - Grindhouse is gonna kick ass, so we should all go see it....

again i state my opposition to absolutes.  I dont like tarantino and i have no ineterest in the grindhouse movies from the past, so i have no desire to go see it. 

the CORRECT statement is, some people will think it kicks ass, and THOSE people should go see it

[Pak-Man]

Well I think we can all agree that there will more than likely be some people who enjoy it, some people won't, and still others may not see it at all. It's quite likely that several people might not even hear about it. But since we're not into relativism here, one of the two groups that were able to form an opinion is right, so there IS a chance that J-Proof's statement is absolutely correct.. :^)

[Sharktopus]

So, if Joe Bankrobber had never seen the movie "Guy Robs A Bank" he wouldn't rob banks in real life?

Im not implying anything of the kind.  Im merely stating that to say NO ONE is confused or affected by what they see is as lunatic as saying EVERYONE is effected by what they see.

Remember back in school, when some jerk got up to no good, and the teacher couldn't figure out who it was, so she just punished everybody? It's the same thing. It's that kind of slippery slope. If you start to blame entertainment for society's ills, eventually you end up with that "Itchy & Scratchy" episode where they just sit in rocking chairs sipping lemonade.

Well I think we can all agree that there will more than likely be some people who enjoy it, some people won't, and still others may not see it at all. It's quite likely that several people might not see it.

Don't forget the group of people who'll refuse to see it, but will still boycott and condemn it. If your children see it, they'll go out and chop their legs off to get assault rifle prosthetics. (I don't mean you, Sarc. I understand and respect your opinion. It's too bad, though - Guy Robs A Bank is an awesome flick.)