Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

How Much are Movies Themselves to Blame for Aurora Massacre?
The Virginian ^ | 7/28/2012 | Moneyrunner

Posted on 07/28/2012 8:41:59 AM PDT by moneyrunner

If it's now coming out that the Colorado Killer, James Holmes, was obsessed with being a character in the Batman movie, shouldn't we be having a national discussion on how much Hollywood is responsible for this murderous rampage. And while we're at it, a lot of the other social ills like the sexualization of teens, out-of-wedlock births and gang violence, all depicted in living color on the silver screen? On Tuesday, Matt Drudge linked to a blistering attack on Hollywood by Charles Hurt of the Washington Times in response to the massacre at the midnight Friday showing of the new Batman movie in Aurora, Colorado: You are devastated that such an “innocent and hopeful place” — here you are talking about the movie theaters that play your twisted movies — would be violated in such an “unbearably savage” way. I mean, really, who could think up such monstrous hatred and nihilistic violence? Umm, have you watched any of your own movies lately?

And, in the selfless modesty that is the hallmark of an Academy Awards ceremony, you tell us that your “feelings” about the massacre are so deeply profound that the mere words of the English language built up over hundreds of years are simply not up to the task of describing them. Wow. You do have a gift for fantasy.

But the real clue that you remain shrouded in guilt-free delusion is when you mention the “senseless tragedy that has befallen the entire Aurora community.” Senseless? Really? If by “senseless” you mean carried out almost precisely from the scripts of your own movies, then, sure, it was “senseless.”


TOPICS: Arts/Photography; Books/Literature; Music/Entertainment; TV/Movies
KEYWORDS: blame; hollywood; influence; jamesholmes; movies

1 posted on 07/28/2012 8:42:03 AM PDT by moneyrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
I'm not convinced that movies are the cause of violence.
But I'm quite sure that gun ownership is definitely not the cause of violence.

Certainly if we are going to look at the Bill of Rights and say "one of these amendments has got to be thrown out" -- I would keep the second amendment and I would be willing to at least discuss limits to Leftist media outlets like Hollywood, MSNBC and the NYT. I would think it wouldn't come to that and that we could keep the Constitution just as it is ... but they want to talk about taking away some basic rights ...

2 posted on 07/28/2012 8:48:17 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I grew up in the 50’s watching cowboys & indians, cops and robbers and war movies. Most kids back then play acted the same. Today, a kid can be suspended just for drawing a gun at school.

Nah, I think something else is wrong here.


3 posted on 07/28/2012 8:49:22 AM PDT by umgud (No Rats, No Rino's)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
Movies are fake, so if the movie is responsible for death then the death is fake.

Just another "pass the buck" attitude to remove blame from a murderer.

Movies don't kill any more than guns or SUVs kill.

4 posted on 07/28/2012 8:50:06 AM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS

Actually I think our degrading society is the biggest factor.


5 posted on 07/28/2012 8:53:23 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: umgud
Drawing ones gun at school is probably illegal in all states. They are too young for a CCW. I apologize in advance
6 posted on 07/28/2012 8:57:15 AM PDT by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Savage has been pushing this line too - and I think it’s complete crap. I have watched (and enjoyed) a large number of violent movies and played a large number of violent games in my life and you don’t see me shooting up a theater - or anything else for that matter.

Even without violent movies and games the people that would otherwise pull such a stunt are going to find something else to imitate. You can’t fix stupid.


7 posted on 07/28/2012 8:58:35 AM PDT by TheZMan (Obama is without a doubt the worst President ever elected to these United States)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

What no one seems to look at is the REAL cause for the massacre was sin, and sin is born out of lust, and this guy’s lust was to fulfill his fantasy that he was a larger than life character that wielded the power of life and death over innocent people. Is he wacked out of his head? Yes. Did he know it was wrong to shoot those people? Definitely. But in his lust to play the Joker, he put his desires above all others, even their very lives. What caused him to do it? Acting on his sinful desires.


8 posted on 07/28/2012 8:59:37 AM PDT by job
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TheZMan

We were raised in a world where fantasy was kept clearly in its place. The border between reality and fantasy are blurred these days and no one questions the difference.


9 posted on 07/28/2012 9:02:34 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

It’s not the fault of the movies. It’s the fault of society in not teaching manners or morals.I’m all about freedom,but self control and respect for others rights isn’t taught these days. Someone else’s right to swing their fist stops some distance from my nose. No responsibility and no accountability is the rule of the day


10 posted on 07/28/2012 9:05:06 AM PDT by Figment
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

There was no such thing as crazy people before cinamatography and 24 news channels?


11 posted on 07/28/2012 9:05:50 AM PDT by goodwithagun (My gun has killed fewer people than Ted Kennedy's car.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek
I made that point on another thread.

Reality TV shows are pretty obviously scripted. At the Olympics, we saw "the queen" parachute into the stadium. We get a celebration of Peter Pan and Lord Voldemort, and later we will watch picture-perfect little synopses of the life of Michael Phelps and a handful of other athletes.

It all blends into a mishmash of a consumerist fantasy world. Few people seem to know what reality is anymore, and few people seem to care.

12 posted on 07/28/2012 9:13:26 AM PDT by ClearCase_guy (Roger Taney? Not a bad Chief Justice. John Roberts? A really awful Chief Justice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

In other words, How much should we blame water for making things wet??


13 posted on 07/28/2012 9:15:54 AM PDT by eyeamok
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

The root problem is the mixed signals of cultural liberalism juxtaposed with the violence perpetuated by mostly liberal film media writers, producers and directors aimed at the gullible public into believing that the “Liberal American Dream.” is real. You know, the dream where bad guy conservative militia nutballs or fatcat capitalist pigs get their just rewards?

Liberal America, DEMOCRAT America along with its complicit entertainment industry are systematically relieving these sheep from their resources, controlling their lives and their futures, and getting very, very rich in the process.

What is left after that? You’re seeing it. The self examination and pseudosympathy for the victims and the neverending attempt to put off all this sh!t on conservatives. Patently transparent, sophomoric at best, but Hey, it is working because their obedient minions are idiots.


14 posted on 07/28/2012 9:21:55 AM PDT by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Indeed!


15 posted on 07/28/2012 9:27:11 AM PDT by afraidfortherepublic (ABO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

The first and only line of defence is the mental health doctors who may have been treating him. They know what he is thinking, feeling and sometimes planning yet these cowards stand behind the confidentiality clause even if it means mass murder. I understand the importance of this clause but in the case of commiting mass murder or murder in general these intellectual weasels have a duty to report these people and put them on a watch list. The constitutional rights of these victims and thier families have been violated first and formost.


16 posted on 07/28/2012 9:27:30 AM PDT by ronnie raygun (bb)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
I, too, as a child, emulated the cowboys. I had the hat, the spurs, and the cap pistol. I chased down the bad guys and either outdrew them, or put them in "jail".

We also played detective, policeman, and fireman.

We shot a lot of "bad guys", for sure, but the underlying theme of most of the older movies was the triumph of good over evil.

But the thought has never entered my mind to actually shoot another human being, as I was taught by my parents that killing is wrong.

The two differences are - IMHO - many of today's movies glorify evil and the teachings at home seem to be how to shoplift a ham at Walmart, or fill out welfare forms.

Knowing right from wrong was a big part of growing up. Sunday School on Sundays, morning devotionals at school, and guidance from parents and mentors they approved of gave us an ingrained awareness of the difference between good and evil.

Horror movies didn't show chain saws cutting off peoples heads with splattering blood, it was cheesy B&W Dracula and King Kong. We instinctively knew that it wasn't real, but it was scary.

The missing element that explains the whole gamut of violence is the family unit, and its teachings, and the villification of religion.

Everybody at guns, real guns, back then...I got my first 20 gauge shotgun when I was 12...but the only thing I ever killed with it was a few tin cans. I never even shot a bird with my Daisy BB gun. My Dad promised me that if I ever shot anyone, or did damage with it, he would physically wrap it around the Elm tree that stood in our front yard (and probably me with it).

I believed him.

It's not the guns, it's not even totally the movies, it's the lack of teaching of morals and honesty that prevails. The law of the jungle has overtaken the law of the land, and the law abiding are paying the bill.


17 posted on 07/28/2012 9:32:45 AM PDT by FrankR (They will become our ultimate masters the day we surrender the 2nd Amendment.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Movies or any entertainment media are just an expression of what is valued or not valued by the society itself.

It’s not the violence of movies that’s a problem (some of the old ones were pretty violent, too), but the exaltation of evil...and that’s happening in our society. Have the movies and TV encouraged it by presenting evil as something powerful and to be emulated while never presenting heroic goodness? Yes, but it was there to begin with.

When the SF Zoo is hastily taking down a rarely-noticed stone tablet hidden under some azaleas and engraved with the Ten Commandments simply because an athiest organization complained and now the Ten Commandments are “controversial,” I think we can see where the problem lies.


18 posted on 07/28/2012 9:35:08 AM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

0%.


19 posted on 07/28/2012 9:37:23 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

I’m wondering if children having access to these violent images could be part of it. Back before you could rent videos and watch movies like that right at home, we didn’t have this happening. I never allowed my kids access to a R rated movie before they were 17 (now what they saw at friends houses etc is another story) but now adults are taking their very small children to see these movies at the theatre (wasn’t the youngest child killed aged 6 or 9?) as well as allowing them to see it at home. If you’ve ever seen movies like 7 with Brad Pitt...think how something like that would affect a 6 year old. Not to mention the porn that probably plays non stop in some households. Makes me sick to my stomach.


20 posted on 07/28/2012 9:38:14 AM PDT by happilymarriedmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Crazy people obsess over lots of things, you could never remove every possible influence to their delusions, nor would it stop the delusions. All you would do is inconvenience the rest of us who are not crazy and will never develop a violent delusion no matter how many violent movies we watch.


21 posted on 07/28/2012 9:40:10 AM PDT by Valpal1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: umgud
Yes, there was violence in the 1950’s too but it was not GRAPHIC with exploding heads and chests or savage beatings like in the spiderman movies. Just look at the 1960’s tongue & cheek Batman series compared to the stream of Batman films that have come out in recent years. Look at the Joker for example. Cesar Romero played the Joker in the 1960’s. Yes, he was a villain, yes he was evil and criminal but he did not look HIDEOUS and darkly evil like the current Batman films. All I am saying is that Hollywood and the rest of popular TV/Film culture has upped the ante in terms of GRAPHIC violence since the days of John Wayne and the Indian wars. The thrill and shock factor bar is set so high that if there is no massive blood and GRAPHIC gore, the film just doesn't cut the EXTREME mustard.
22 posted on 07/28/2012 9:41:33 AM PDT by Netz (Netz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: livius
A perfect example of cartoonish a bad guy that conservatives could find at least some agreement with.

Image Hosted by ImageShack.us

An adult conservative had no problem accepting the fact that he was a bad guy while admiring the free market spirit in him.

Its as if society is leaving following generations with stunted emotional and intellectual growth and incapable of complex conflicting thoughts.
23 posted on 07/28/2012 9:48:22 AM PDT by cripplecreek (What does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but loses his soul?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

probably because we refuse to be our brothers’ keepers


24 posted on 07/28/2012 10:03:14 AM PDT by InvisibleChurch ( if you love, you will not condemn, and if you condemn, you cannot love)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner
How Much are Movies Themselves to Blame for Aurora Massacre?

There is one and only one thing/person to blame, and that is the despicable POS who commited this crime.

25 posted on 07/28/2012 10:05:08 AM PDT by from occupied ga (Your government is your most dangerous enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

300,000,000 people see a cumulative one-third to one trillion murders depicted per year.
One third to one half of those people have easy access to a gun.
For all that, there is about one mass shooting per year.
That pretty much eliminates any correlation.
That pretty much proves no causation.

In contrast, 93 people are killed each day with automobiles.
And nobody gives a damn.


26 posted on 07/28/2012 10:09:40 AM PDT by ctdonath2 ($1 meals: http://abuckaplate.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

There was a Cracked.com article on the most vicious, horrific scenes in Shakespeare. Cutting off a girl’s tongue and hands. Feeding a dead child to an unsuspecting parent. Murders of parents by children and vice versa. Shakespeare had lots of blood, guts and gore. No one is blaming his classic works for murders through the centuries.
Blame the murderers, not the social media they may have watched.


27 posted on 07/28/2012 10:31:04 AM PDT by tbw2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Hollywood must have been worried that their films may have caused the murder of JFK. They immediately withdrew THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE from circulation for many years.

After the death of Bobby Kennedy all movies from the 1940s through the 1960s were recut and butchered to remove “excessive violence” before being shown on TV. Now, if those movies had no influence why were they recut?

And if movies don’t influence people why is there so much product placement in them? Now James Bond is drinking a European beer instead of his usual “Shaken, not stirred”. drink.

What inspired a kid to think he could fly and throw himself out of an apartment window after seeing SUPERMAN?

What inspired an idiot to injure himself jumping his unmodified auto like THE DUKES OF HAZARD?

Why did white dinner jackets fly off the shelf after James Bond wore one in DR NO?

Why did the .44 mag S&W become scarce after the DIRTY HARRY movie?

What inspired Colt to start making their old Peacemaker in the 1950s?

What inspired two young people to go on a killing spree after seeing NATURAL BORN KILLERS?

Movies are not so much entertainment as a source of advertizement. They won’t affect most of us but then there are still kooks out there.


28 posted on 07/28/2012 10:40:01 AM PDT by Ruy Dias de Bivar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ronnie raygun

Your comment is off base, psychiatrists have a duty to report criminal activity, and they adhere to it. The idea that a psychiatrist is breaking patient confidentiality by reporting criminal activity is a Hollywood myth. You can bet that this shrink had no idea what he was planning.


29 posted on 07/28/2012 11:01:19 AM PDT by Melas (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: job

Thank you for cutting to the chase and describing what happened from a biblical, theologically correct position = the root of the problem - sin, the motivation behind his henious actions - his own lusts, and the fact that he alone bears responsibility for his crimes, not “guns” or movies, etc.


30 posted on 07/28/2012 11:07:55 AM PDT by Jmouse007 (Lord deliver us from evil, in Jesus name, amen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

Movies can affect those prone to violence or the mentally unstable. In the early 70’s I was stationed at Hill AFB, at the base theater they played a Eastwood Dirty Harry Film (Magnum Force IIRC) a week later 3 airmen from the base went into Ogden UT and acted out a murder during the course of a robbery ie made people drink drano as a guy in the film did.

Clearly these people were prone to violence and went to prison for their crimes, however the roles of the movie with these criminals cannot be ignored.


31 posted on 07/28/2012 11:40:41 AM PDT by Leto
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: moneyrunner

If the guy was obsessed with being the Joker he sure didn’t do a good job of it. Clothes are all wrong, color scheme is all wrong, the bombs as distraction plan was kind of Joker-esque except his bombs didn’t work, then there’s the whole giving himself up peacefully thing. Pretty much not Joker, which tells you exactly how much it’s because of the movies: not at all.


32 posted on 07/28/2012 11:47:54 AM PDT by discostu (Welcome back my friends to the show that never ends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Netz
Yes, there was violence in the 1950’s too but it was not GRAPHIC with exploding heads and chests or savage beatings like in the spiderman movies.

You could make the case that it's video games as much or more than movies that influence these kooks.

Just look at the 1960’s tongue & cheek Batman series compared to the stream of Batman films that have come out in recent years. Look at the Joker for example. Cesar Romero played the Joker in the 1960’s.

Well, as you say, it was a tongue-in-cheek version made for the family television audience, so there wasn't an opportunity for graphic violence.

I watched a documentary about exploitation film director Roger Corman recently. He's been doing some very gory and grisly stuff for almost 60 years now, without it having much effect, so far as I know.

To be sure, though, Roger Corman's movies were so low budget and cheesy and the effects were so obvious that few self-respecting nuts would want to imitate them.

33 posted on 07/28/2012 11:57:46 AM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: x
No doubt that the video game world has added to this bloody, gory, realism but combine this with Hollywood's fascination with violence and Armageddon scenarios (New York has already been wiped off the map 26 times) and you get a disaster-oriented, blood splattering, Rambo - it's cool to “waste ‘em” society. Even in the JFK, famous “Zapruder” film where JFK is murdered graphically, it took from 1963 to 1975 just to release the segment to the American public. No, we are all de-sensitized now and require greater and greater violence thresholds just to get the thrill of movie going.
34 posted on 07/28/2012 8:57:13 PM PDT by Netz (Netz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Ruy Dias de Bivar

Great points. I don’t know why others aren’t seeing this.


35 posted on 07/29/2012 5:40:45 PM PDT by InHisService (Jesus is coming back. Are you ready?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson