Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Bowling for Columbine and the Xbox 360 Commercial

Sometimes the irony of life has interesting twists…

Last night I seen “Bowling For Columbine for the first time. For those who might not know it, it is a documentary directed by Michael Moore, after the shootings that occurred in columbine High School, in Littleton, on April, 20, 1999.

Bowling for Columbine (Wikipedia)

Not my point here to discuss if Michael Moore might be right or wrong, but this movie echoed with some commercial I have seen yesterday… the now all famous banned commercial for the new Xbox 360.

Banned CM

….where we can see people mimicking a “shoot ‘em all” in what looks like a big Mall, very a la cop movie. They do not carry weapons or guns. They yell “bang”, pointing a finger at their supposed victim, which then pretend to collapse. The whole thing on a funny background music, kinda like a bunch of brats playing guns.

Granted, this one has been banned for obvious reasons, certainly it is not a good example to show to kids. Maybe they might get some weird ideas, you know, begging for a pricey playstation or worse, borrowing daddy’s 9mm , and go postal at school. Sadly enough that second option has occurred more than once, so yeah, I won’t disagree on the banning issue.

But still I'd like to highlight some points that amazed me.

There is something particularly disturbing when I hear some people making a parallel with terrorism. If all the shooting scenes would lead to terrorism acts, then it is not one commercial we should ban, but the whole cinematographic and TV panel, from Theater release to documentary, Tv news of course, and cops series. All in all, it would mean banning about a third of what the visual media produce.

I do not making myself the advocate of violence. I simply would like to highlight that it sounds to me more like some hypocritical decision, rather than something accomplished for the humanity welfare.

Let’s ban the commercial, but not the games themselves.

Let’s blame Marilyn Manson ( a guy who, btw, has a more intelligent discourse than Charlton Heston promoting the NRA) and Tarantino movies , but let’s shut up on the fact that Clinton bombed a lot of innocent people (medication factories and schools: where the fuck were the terrorist in there?)

Let’s ban Harry Potter books and movies, where people obviously die in huge pain (ever read HP 6? And how Harry obliges Dumbledore to swallow the potion that is gonna kill him at last?)

Let’s have our kids get their own internet connexion in their own room (when sometimes the parents hardly know how internet works all in all…MSN? MMORPG? Communities?…)

Let’s scream against terrorism, but advocate some bombing “for the own sake of our country” (insert any country name you’d like, I think a lot of them do lead a policy of “attacking first so that we are safe”).


Let’s all declare that games are the roots of all evil, that commercial are what causes all the violence, but let’s close our eyes on the fact that people get bombed, or verbally harassed and assaulted (one of the biggest problem in the corporate world..). Let’s forget that Japan is the biggest producer of violent games…with the lowest crime rate. (Suicide being out of the point here)

Hitler or Mussolini never played with a Xbox.

For once, let’s face the fact that deranged people do not need a movie or a commercial to put their weird ideas into action.

Let’s face the fact that if the daddys or retailers hadn’t such an easy access to guns, maybe kids won’t be able to shoot people as easily….. (selling ammos in supermarket, is IMO, far more dangerous than watching a silly commercial: because this is not a second degree humourous tv spot, it is reality, real ammos you can get along with a pack of crackers or a can of juice).

Let’s face the fact that as long as society will blame the wrong culprits, you can be certain violence will still be around. And not for the supposed obvious reasons everyone is complaining about.

5 comments:

bran and shing said...

ne...onechan, this sounds like a really big distress call for you eh? ^____^ i don't really think that we should be pointing fingers on who is right or wrong. everything happens in this life happens for a reason. so i guess i'll accept is and not blame on people :) just my two cents on this ^^ hope everything's fine there. take care ne?

Ichiban said...

Thank you for your comment , Brandon !!

"I don't really think that we should be pointing fingers on who is right or wrong. everything happens in this life happens for a reason."

Thsi very sentence of yours did really made me think about the whole issue from another point of view..

^^

David said...

Just wanted to point out that I wasn't advocating for having it banned. I just thought it was a piece of television that didn't really deserve the creativity that went into it. Human talents (and capital) could be much better spent. In short, stupid that it exists, stupid that it's banned.

That is oceans away from believing or proving that one thing causes another. Yet legitimate cultural criticism need not rely on causality arguments; that is just an overly deterministic syntax some people are stuck rehashing.

I'm not sure what incident(s) specifically you're referring to with Clinton, either, but if you're referring to Infinite Reach (the missile strikes in Afghanistan) I think there's a good pragmatic argument for having made the decision he did, given how much harm bin Laden (or even more his icon and the actions people have excused by it) has subsequently caused. That aside... It certainly should be open to discussion. I'm not sure who was trying to gag that conversation.

Ichiban said...

I read your posts on the forums, and I thank you for having taken the time to comment, David: I think I now sense more what your point is.

Ah, I think that what really got me mad, is reading how some ppl made a comparision between that commercial and terrorism acts... Hence my point in saying that , ok, if ppl ban a commercial and accuse it of terrorism- inducing message, then, on that very logic, ppl must ban everything else carrying every other threatening images...Why that CM in particular, and not some other violent films? Or games themselves? Maybe I did some (clumsy, I now realize) parallelisms , wanting to push the absurdity the farest possible...

And yet I shouldn't judge because I never been in a situation of terrorism.I never known the threat of seeing planes coming out of nowhere and crash and destroy everything around in a blast of time. Or a subway attacked, though it is a transportation I almost exclusively use.

(another point that I'd like to develop one day, is how i can get influenced in my judgement by what see..I mean...hadn't I seen that bowling for columbine thingy... would i have reacted as strongly as i did?)

***

I sincerely believe that violence people see everyday on TV cannot be the only responsible for violence around. If that would be, almost all of us would have homicidal tendencies...

As i said, in the commercial, everyone is pretending. (the very end, in the cab, is , to me, what makes the CM stay in the joke mode . the "hold on for a sec, i am on the phone" attitude, then the play dead pretending..)Like when Calvin and Hobbes play that way, yelling "bang", and pretending to die...Is is the , yes, stupidity of the CM that really made me laugh...because it is so improbable...

About Clinton, I heard it when watching "bowling for columbine". (supposedly that day was the day when the bombings on IRaq where the biggest, amount of missiles speaking) Michael Moore made point that no one had ever blamed it upon that bombing for the columbine slaugther...then he concluded on an ironic point, saying that , maybe, since the teen-killers did play bowling just before attacking the school, maybe it was bowling the responsible...

***

Ah I didn't want to start a whole discussion on the forum, that's why I vented out in here ^^ But please, feel free to react, even if you disagree. I'd say especially if you disagree ^^ I think that's what makes the debates grow interesting :bigthumb:

David said...

I pretty much agree with you. It's so easy to 'see' associations between one event and another, so I understand why people would see something they don't like and think quickly of terrorism to describe it. But of course responsibly making connections is a lot harder than speculating about them. Wikipedia suggests to me that Bowling for Columbine is a very good example of that actually, drawing some false connections of its own. It just goes to show how powerful connecting can be.

As for the commercial what I think makes it uniquely 'worthy' of being banned is how totally everday everything in it appears, except for the plot being simulated. To me the ad is intimating that the specific advantage of the XBOX360 is that, whereas any game can turn you into a fantastical and heroic figure, with multiplayer or whatever, you can be yourself in your own world and still kill people.

In short it's not the violence that distinguishes this ad but rather its insistence that violence is ordinary.