Catching Up On Iffy: Story Two
The weekend when Nikki Finke stood up for the importance of box office reporting (God forbid she give up any page views) also has prompted a couple of wild pieces blaming the whole thing on movie marketing. And these were not from radical neo-cons or rabid candidates trying to attack liberal Hollywood on the campaign trail.
One is from Patrick Goldstein, left-leaning, but right-swinging blogger from the LA Times. And the other is from Mark Lipsky, who with his brother Jeff brought us films like Paris is Burning.
So let’s try to get this right… the answer to mass murder is censorship?
Wait! Neither man said as much… in so many words… as precisely.
It’s actually a little worse than just censoring movies. They think the ads for The Dark Knight Rises may have responsibility in this massacre.
“…marketing where, in the case of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, untold resources are hysterically and relentless directed at cultivating and inciting fanboys – and fangirls – into a frenzy of obsession and anticipation.”
“…it is two things at once: a giant fireball of mass marketing as well as a disturbing, dystopian vision of our culture. That makes it a powerful magnet, both for passionate fans and sometimes, for crazed nutcases.”
“It was a conspiracy that included the filmmakers, the studio and their marketing teams and the media. Especially the media who conspire in these things with giddy abandon. They obviously didn’t have a hand in planning the actual shootings but the collaborators in this case poured tens – maybe hundreds of millions of dollars – and thousands of man-hours into manufacturing a giant petri dish filled with a greed-fueled brew irresistible to young, impressionable filmgoers and like Dr. Frankenstein their perverse experiment went horribly wrong.”
“I’ve always believed that artists should have the right to explore whatever territory they want, no matter how dark or discordant. But the public has rights too. We’ve always heard that if you don’t like what you see on your TV, you can turn it off. But today’s gargantuan Hollywood marketing campaigns are so all-pervasive that we can’t close our eyes and blink away the images.”
Oh.
My.
God.
Are you fucking kidding me?
Neither man mentions the 6000+ rounds or semi-automatic weapons or 100-bullet clip he bought without anyone raising an eyebrow, on the web and at local branches of national sporting goods chains.
Guns don’t kill people. Movie marketing kills people.
Do I need to make an argument here? I don’t think so.
“Guns don’t kill people. Movie marketing kills people.”
Isn’t that what Chucky’s been saying for years?
I consider myself a normal human. Nothing much outrages me, but I still feel icky about certain things. And on this one, sorry, my friend…the older I get, I feel like people are absolutely messed up by the media and the flip “entertainment” usage of terrible things. Of course I’m not blaming movie marketing…but the contention from so many that guns are solely to blame — while everyone else gets a free pass — that just doesn’t fly with me anymore. And more to the point, it’s a terrible liberal personality flaw — and I’m one of them, so it’s a fair complaint — that it’s OK to blame so many things…but the minute anyone dares blame Hollywood, it’s verboten. I’m just not buying it anymore. I think Hollywood absolutely does a fucked up job of putting evil shit in people’s heads. I’m not obsessed about it nor am I looking to change the world. But I think Hollywood can be dangerous to the wrong people. Just like guns. That’s all.
Dana Stevens, unfortunately, is on the same misguided and slippery slope.
Hi David –
As someone who has had more of an impact on the rancid ratings system than anyone else I’m aware of (directly responsible for inciting the industry-wide revolt against ‘X’ – ok, that unfortunately only resulted in NC-17 rather than something meaningful but nobody’s perfect) I’m the opposite of a censor. Let Warner Bros. and Christopher Nolan make all the Batman movies they like and let them make an ultra-violent comic book storyline as absurdly and damagingly authentic and realistic as possible. But please don’t censor my right to question their ethics and motives or especially those of the media who, if you re-read my post you’ll notice I call out more loudly than Mr. Nolan or the Studio. With a re-read you may also notice that the post is titled “MPAA Perhaps Most Complicit In Colorado Shootings” which would indicate that I’m far more concerned about the age of those attending the film than the thoughtlessness of the filmmakers. (Yes, I believe they’re entirely thoughtless about the potential hazards of ramming ultraviolence and depravity down the throats of young American minds. But that’s their right.)
As for the gun issue, I believe it’s appalling but secondary. Auto/semi-auto should absolutely be banned and we all owe it to each other to be on the lookout for individuals who purchase thousands of rounds of ammunition.
However, whether this guy walked in there and shot 100 people using a semi-automatic or one person only with a pair of Glocks, there’s no such thing in a society as a lone wolf gunman. Entirely sane or entirely insane, the things we see and hear affect us all and in-your-face mayhem tends to have a more lasting negative effect – especially on young and at-risk minds – than something possibly less dramatic but just as effective. But that’s the filmmaker’s choice and right.
No, I’m not fucking kidding and I’m certainly not remotely calling for censorship. And I’m thrilled that we’re out here in the light having this discussion because it’s never going to happen on the Studio lot or the newsroom – and certainly not at the MPAA.
Thanks for the opportunity to try and raise the bar rather than crawling under the one set by Hollywood, the media and the MPAA.
All best, Mark.
” the things we see and hear affect us all and in-your-face mayhem tends to have a more lasting negative effect – especially on young and at-risk minds – than something possibly less dramatic but just as effective. But that’s the filmmaker’s choice and right.”
So here’s the thing i take issue with in this statement. You’re basically asserting that the studios create a mania by overmarketing their product? That’s bananas in a way i can’t even really fathom.
I can understand and at least see the logic in certain arguments that get made around the issues, that violent programming can desensitize people to violence. That playing games like Call of Duty where you shoot people over and over again can have an impact on kids. I can tolerate and stomach those arguments.
But to say that the marketing for the film somehow has an impact on the deranged, that’s just the lunatic fringe talking my friend.
Tell me what part of the Dark Knight Rises ads ‘rammed ultraviolence’ into the minds of Americans. Here’s the 30 second spots for the film one two three
I would hardly call any of these spots ‘ultra violent’. Maybe 10 seconds of the spots contain sparks from gunfire or a firey explosion. Most of them are character based with the quick cuts to some action beats to sell it. It’s no more ultraviolent than The Avengers spot.
To compare, here’s a trailer for Gone With the Wind, which i believe was a re-release trailer from the 1960s.
Fire, cities burning, people throwing punches.
If you’re going to make a grand claim, you need to define your terms.
What constitutes “ultra-violence” Mark? And i ask that question in all sincerity. I’d love to know your definition.
What i find funny is that you have this fucked up kid who does this stupid thing and he screams IM THE JOKER. But the entire point of The Dark Knight was that when the chips are down, the good people of Gotham didn’t eat each other. When they had he opportunity to kill one another to guarantee their own survival, the didn’t.
The Dark Knight was about honor, sacrifice, and the acknowledgment that people prefer order to anarchy. The fact that this message was lost on some crackpot insane asshole shouldn’t be a rallying cry for censorship in media. The kid didn’t get it. Obviously. And if you talk to anyone in the mental health profession with any sense of legitimacy they will tell you that media does not create monsters. They identify with media and at times latch onto specific images and iconography in an effort to express themselves. However, they are simply choosing a vehicle in which to harness their anger and rage. That anger and rage would still be present whether Warner Brothers marketed the fuck out of The Dark Knight rises or not.
If someone walked into the Super Bowl and started firing shots, would you blame the networks and the NFL for creating a mania around the game? Isn’t that what marketing is designed to do? To create a ‘must see’ event ?
And what about the thousands of other screenings that had no such issues. What about every other movie in the history of mankind that was marketed and created no random acts of violence. Even if your argument is remotely right (it’s not), you have a single solitary instance of someone going into a movie theater and killing innocent people.
One solitary shooter. And yes, one is plenty. It’s a tragedy. But are you seriously going to argue that there is a problem based on one kid, at one theater, at one screening of a movie?
Balls, my friend. Pure balls.
It makes me think of the Maralyn Manson argument used after Columbine, or the Tea Party argument used after the Arizona shooting last year. It’s specious reasoning with no conclusive evidence or even well thought out arguments. Knee jerk reactions from people based on ill formed opinions.
Proof Mark. I need proof. I need facts. And please don’t point to Aurora. Because for your one shooter at one screening, i have hundreds of thousands of screenings over decades for ‘over marketed’ films.
People camped out for a month at the Phantom Menace to see it. I don’t remember anyone being murdered at the screening, other than the metaphoric murder of people’s childhoods.
I need an argument based on fact, not conjecture. I need proof, not opinions. If you can’t provide that, why even bring it up into ‘the light of day’. The light doesn’t shine too favorably on your side of the argument, which i believe is “the sky is falling”
Snore.
This argument always makes me think of this
http://benigngirl.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/irresponsibility.jpg
Obsessive fans, dystopian vision of our culture…couldn’t you say the same thing about Transformers? Or even Lady Gaga?
Liberty dies one frivolous lawsuit at a time.
The lawsuit is so predictably sad. The guy basically said “someone has to pay”. That’s America for ya. Every tragedy has a dollar figure. “i got shot at a movie theater and now I deserve to get paid”. So sad.