Immortal Boner
Fri, 01-02-2004, 01:16 PM
</div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Swallow Your Soul @ Jan 1 2004, 08:38 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> </div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rock Lee @ Jan 1 2004, 01:43 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Wow people like that show, i mean i understand that that its violent and disturbing, i mean Ichi literally masterbates to others being raped... not a normal guy. However it lacked anything else making it worth watching. The charcters had no personality worth mentioning and the chick who spoke english and japenese sometimes was about as lifeless as possible. The plot itself had tons of holes and explained very little, i believe it was ment for people who had read the manga for it. From what i understand the uncut edition is on suprnova thats where i got mine. For any of you reading this thread wondering what were tlaking about the movies like a bad snuff film, with dated japenese affecst and terrible writing even for a movie from wherever in asia it was made im assuming japan because "Ichi" is one in jap. Just my humble opnion but showing someone more violence decenatizes them to it making them more prone to commit said acts. I can remember when that movie with marlan wayans and those other people about drugs came out a few years ago everyone was like "hey show this one to all the drug addicts they'll never wanna do drugs again". I don't know too many people who've seen that movie sober it makes no sense. I"ll update this once i remember what the movie was called. </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
I think its meant to have a comic-book style to it, much of the violence is totally over the top and I think the film sets its stall out as it is, there isn't a great deal of story to it but judging from interviews I've seen with the director that seemed to be pretty much the plan...
I don't think watching violent films makes people more likely to commit such acts at all. This all reminds me of the 'video nasties' thing that went on over here during the 90's.
It still amazes me how movies like Ichi The Killer, bands like Slipknot and Marilyn Manson, and video games like Twisted Metal Black are censored and criticised for being violent and inspiring violent behaviour, and yet I've seen huge colour photos of corpses of heroin addicts, corpses of Saddam Husseins brothers etc on the front pages of newspapers! Also, I remember on September 11th, the news cut in during childrens TV time (ie "we interrupt this cartoon to bring you news of...." etc) to show action replays of aeroplanes flying into buildings, and filming a guy falling to his death from a fucking great height! The camera followed him falling to his death for ages and I guess I just find it surprising that people don't seem to have a problem allowing children to see demonstrations of real life violence and showing them mutilated war victims and corpses, while censoring films that are directed at an ADULT audience, which come from someones imagination... </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'>
You have a valid point but I think the consensus of people just reason that the videogames and music that depict violence are used for entertainment purposes. The media outlets such as the newspaper depicting corpses and the footage of the WTC was clearly to inform. And they do censor what is shown in the news (ex: All the photos they took of the WTC victims upclose, video of Daniel Pearl's body being cut up, etc.)
It's likely that both would potentially desensitize the public at large, but I think the entertainment aspects of it has alot more weight in terms of being impressionable.
It's comparable to Playboy and figure drawing class. I still remember being 14 and be in a class where I draw pictures of naked women, whereas I would be restricted from ever buying a playboy magazine. Another example is restricting access to violence that goes with R-rated movies and being allowed to watch on tv "ER".
The medium and it's motive in which something is depicted in, has alot to do with what is censored and what is not. Such as with the playboy example. One is depicted as tasteful art whereas the other's motive is to get you a boner.
Are forms of entertainment such as videogames and music impressionable? To some who are more sensitive to it then yes it is (and I would say music to a higher degree.) This would vary from individual to individual. But it's undeniable that music does get people into certain moods. Walk down the street and listen to Lifehouse. Then walk down the street and listen to 50 cent.
Does it leave enough of an impression to increase violence? In my opinion it's partly the reflection of the society and thus fosters it. But whether it necessarily makes changes people enough to make them violent depends on the maturity level of the person and also the society as a whole.
Well that's my 2 cents.