Quentin Tarantino Flips Out Over Violence Question

Sure, and in the interest of full disclosure, I paid to see Pulp Fiction. Nevertheless, the fact remains that many of his films do glorify and sensationalize gun violence. I'm not making a value judgement one way or the other here - his films are what they are, and you know as well as I do that they can be incredibly violent as far as films go.

I agree.

Despite whatever influence the media and entertainment industry have on people, particularly those who are psychologically fragile individuals who might act out what they see on the silver screen, I have never blamed the media for these shootings and never will. I've made it clear over and over that the perpetrators of these shootings are solely responsible for their actions.

Like I said, I don't feel any need to scapegoat. However, Tarantino deserves all the flack he's catching because he made the mistake of indulging in scapegoating himself. Now he wants to (*)(*)(*)(*)(*) and moan when he gets a taste of his own medicine. I've got no sympathy for that hypocritical BS.

 

Interviewer was a %$^#&#. I would've told him I'm walking out if he didn't move on. Like Tarantino said, he's selling his movie and that's it. Not having a political discussion with some liberal pr!ck.

 

Except of course...it wont. Immediately we already look to another scapegoat...he must be insane. Heck last I heard he might not even be competant to stand trial. Poor thing.

 

Hollywood remains in denial that they play a part in the violent culture.
The vast majority of people watching Hollywood violence will never be affected to the point of going postal.
But, the constant over the top violence has to have an effect on some people already dealing with forms of violent feelings.

 

Django Unchained $1,882,028 -22% 3,010 $112,462,679

 

I'm not blaming the media for these shootings, but anyone who claims that the media doesn't have any influence on people doesn't know what they're talking about. Media analysts like Marshal McLuhan have made a career out of studying the impact of mass media on people, and the effects are more profound and penetrating than many of us consciously realize.

 

If White people had been oppressed by Black people in the way that Blacks were oppressed, I'm sure it would fly...

How ridiculous that you prefer someone were dead because you don't like their movies...

- - - Updated - - -

Sure, it can influence people, but, you can't blame it...

In the end, it's up to the person...

 

Sure, his films are hyper-violent...

But, they are not reality...

I'm glad you feel that the individuals are responsible for their own actions...

Completely honestly, when has Tarantino blamed anything for violence?

I never heard this, so, this is an honest question...

 

Which you haven't even seen.

 

Key word being WERE, as in past tense, where it should stay. No white person alive today had anything to do with that part of history.

And, I disagree, I don't think whites would have the opportunity to coexist and star in such films if the roles were reversed. Be honest with yourself...

- - - Updated - - -

I don't need to see it. I knew it was absolute propagandic garbage from the beginning.

 

No kidding no White people alive were part of slavery, and, Django Unchained isn't set in present-day...

You try being honest...

If it were entirely reversed, all the way back to slavery days, no one would have a real problem with a White Jamie Foxx making that comment directed about the Black people in the movie...

You act like everybody's mindset would be the exact same now if Whites were slaves, and, Blacks were slaveowners...

 

This is true.

I've always thought that way.

It came from a recent NPR interview - here's the quote c/o the NY Daily News:

 

That doesn't really sound like he's blaming anything...

Just pointing out issues that he feels need to be addressed...

 

That's a great comeback.

However, getting back to Tarantino, he's trying to have it both ways. He wants to scapegoat gun control but he doesn't want people scapegoating his violent films. That's hypocrisy if I ever saw it...

 

What you're too clueless to realize (or perhaps you're being disingenuous) is that people feed off of this garbage, people are subconsciously conditioned by this sort of thing. Self loathing whites continue to loath even more, blacks who feel victimized and entitled continue to be even more so... regardless of the fact that slavery is old history.

The notion that whites could do the same thing if the roles were reversed is beyond laughable. Look at how whites have it in South Africa, and look at how restricted whites are in the nations where they are the majority.

Let me run a realistic scenario by you.

Imagine a movie about a white family who's lived in a neighborhood for several generations, but then several minority families moved in, and suddenly the neighborhood went to pots, yet they refused to move. In other words, the typical white flight scenario that's been played out across the nation for decades. And say that in this neighborhood, the white family faced all sorts of discrimination, intimidation, violence, etc. In this movie, things finally culminate in the matriarch of the family being abducted, then the heroic white male goes and 'kills all the black people' in the movie.

Proceeding this movie, the white Jamie Foxx ask a t.v. audience how great it is that he kills all the black people in the movie... so on and so forth.

Yes, yes, I know... whitey is still wrong in this case, and the minority is justified.

 

Insult me all you feel is necessary, as you have no valid argument...

Said movie would be implying that minorities are inherently violent, and, that is absolute bull(*)(*)(*)(*)...

 

I don't subscribe to the notion that "the issue is gun control". As I've repeatedly stated before, the issue is the homicidal sociopaths who perpetrate these shootings.

What's interesting is that he says that mental health is an issue, but he doesn't want to address how violent movies effect/influence mentally ill people like James Holmes. It's no wonder he gets defensive when confronted with this line of questioning.

 

And Django Unchained suggest what to those without discernment?

 

Just like you can't take away guns from everybody because some people act out violently, you can't blame a movie's potential influence for the same...

- - - Updated - - -

If anybody goes to Django Unchained, and, doesn't realize that it is a movie set in the past, they're either too young to be watching such a movie, or, are sufficiently screwed up that they might act about something else anyway...

But, hang onto your scapegoat...

 

No argument here.

It's like I said elsewhere, we're all swimming in the same environment, but most of us wouldn't even think of shooting up a theater or an elementary school.

 

Essentially, and IMO, what's going on here...and since Sandy Hook... is the progressive left's attempts to ignore, discredit or disarm any and all discussion to potential causes, but ONE

Highly duplicitous....and right in their metaphorical "control the narrative" wheelhouse. It's what they do.

 

Thanks for making your disingeniousness clear and apparent.

 

He makes movies-fiction movies. What is there to be accountable for for crissakes? Don't like violent movies, don't go see them.

 

Nor would I advocate banning violent movies.

To be honest, I don't know what can be done about this situation. Even if we try and go after people who are perceived to be mentally ill, you're going to wind up with situations like Brandon Raub here in Virginia, who got involuntarily committed for posting the lyrics from a rap song on his Facebook page.

It's a (*)(*)(*)(*)ed up situation, and I don't pretend to have the answers...