The way audiences view violence in film.

H

harmonica44

I think a lot of moviegoers have the wrong views of violence personally. My friends all love the movie Kick-Ass for example. They loved it. I hated it, and was actually quite disturbed by it. Mostly cause I thought the level of violence was way too high for the action comedy it was mostly trying to be throughout. Like the scene where one guy is busted up with baseball bats, then burned alive, and a teenager makes a crack about sex, while watching a live execution on the internet. Just disturbing to me.

I showed the movie Oldboy to my friends and they thought that was very disturbing, and too dark for any re-watch value. Yet they can watch Kick-Ass whenever. For me though I found Kick-Ass to be a lot lot more disturbing than Oldboy. It's because Oldboy is mature and deep enough to accept the violence that it presents and doesn't hold back. Where as Kick-Ass is using dark brutal violence simply as an overdone style, but does it for a lighter, more comedic movie. I am more disturbed a movie that has overdone brutality, in it, but doesn't deal with it, in a serious way. At least Oldboy deals with it, and therefore was much less disturbing to me.

It's the same way with a lot of action movies. They try to make the violent predicaments look more adventurous and fun, rather than extremely terrorizing. Don't get me wrong there are a lot of good fun action movies, but some of them take the violence and brutality too far, especially in the past recent years, without dealing it.

So it seems that a lot of audiences want brutal violence, only if they are NOT presented with the harsh no-holds-barred world, that deals with it. They can handle the violence but yet are too disturbed by the reality of them. Am I the only one who thinks it should be the other way around?
 
Last edited:
harmonica44 said:
I think a lot of moviegoers have the wrong views of violence personally. My friends all love the movie Kick-Ass for example.
Click to expand...

I showed the movie Oldboy to my friends and they thought that was very disturbing
Click to expand...

So it seems that a lot of audiences want brutal violence, only if they are NOT presented with the harsh no-holds-barred world of no hope, that deals with it. They can handle the violence but yet are too disturbed by the reality of them. Am I the only one who thinks it should be the other way around?
Click to expand...

I wouldn't judge the tendencies of 'a lot of audiences' by one group of people.
 
harmonica44 you make an interesting point here. What I think you should keep in mind is that your friends might not be really thinking about what they're looking it. The way it's depicted on the screen is supposed to be funny but if you look at it and truly analyze what's going on it's pretty messed up.
 
Actually, I think you understood Kick-Ass a lot better than your friends did. It is intended to be a more deconstructionist satire of comic-book violence (specifically, the 90's anti-hero...the so called "Dark Age" of comics). It seems to have an equal fanbase among people who got it, and find it very disturbing and uncomfortable, and people who don't get it and love it for the violence. Millar can be hard to get (mostly because he has great ideas, but isn't that great of a writer).

But then, there are people who watch Watchmen and think that Rorschach is "awesome", etc.
 
I think you're right in that violence in Kick Ass is viewed very differently.

There it's designed to look comic book (in the same way that Kill Bill's violence looks mangaesque) so the blood is very bright crimson, the knives/swords travel in very clean cuts, there's almost no sound design other squish and splat. Therefore you don't hear bones cracking, the dying moan...etc.

I saw Nicholas Winding Refn's Drive this weekend and it is brutally violent, like gross. There's one scene which is 98% sound design, you almost don't see any of the violence, which made me turn away from the screen. I had a chance to speak to the director after the screening and all I could say was 'That was really good. Really violent though.' :lol:

It all depends on how you present the violence.
 
DanGoloborodko said:
harmonica44 you make an interesting point here. What I think you should keep in mind is that your friends might not be really thinking about what they're looking it. The way it's depicted on the screen is supposed to be funny but if you look at it and truly analyze what's going on it's pretty messed up.
Click to expand...

The violence was oddly realistic for a funny movie though. Especially that execution scene. You could also hear bone crunching in that scene so I did find that more disturbing than Kill Bill. I too like Watchmen yes. But to me there is a distinction. Watchman and Kill Bill were not trying be set in the more funny world that Kick-Ass was.

When I told my friends I thought Kick-Ass was just too violent, they looked at me and didn't understand cause some of my favorite movies have been quite violent, but it's the world that the violence is presented in, that counts as to whether or not a movie is too violent or not, in a lot of cases.
 
Last edited:
I know it's something to think about right? I think that usually action comedies have crap action scenes for the most part. Either on purpose because it's funny or because it's just not well done. The makers if Kick-Ass decided to take a different approach to a specific type of movie. However I think that the whole teenager sex cracks and the burned guy was too much. The scene where the batman looking guy fights in the warehouse that was awesome. But it should've just been that because the movie was just fighting and maybe occasionally funny. Gotta have a healthy balance of both
 
Again, Kill Bill is stylized like a manga, with the intent of being a fun action movie.

Watchmen is a deconstruction of superheroes, with the intent of being a gritty film that makes you think about how super hero behaviour and characters would function in a more realistic world.

Kick Ass is a recontextualization of the glorified ultra-violence in comics, post Dark Knight Returns. With the intent of being disturbing and more than a little sickening. Setting it in a lighter world made the violence that much more extreme, with the intent of pulling you out of "yay, action movie violence" to "wait a minute, am I supposed to be ENJOYING this?" It disturbed you? It was TRYING to.

Like any good comic book nerd, I could pontificate about this for hours :-)
 
Making me feel kind of old

Reading your comments on how different people percieve violent behavior in movies realy makes me feel kind of old because it makes me think about a scene in Talladaga Nights that nearly had me rolling on the floor even though it was appauling and not too far from some peoples reality. Just as violence can have effects on an audience, comedy can too. Children that have a great lack of respect for their elders are going to be adults that have no respect for anyone and as funny as it is to see Walker and Texas Ranger disrespect their grandfather it shows the lack of responsibility some parents have when it comes tyo bringing up their children even close to properly. I know it is only entertainment but I have to say now that I have a son that will more than likely come across this kind of thing in his young life it makes me feel like, well, I guess kind of old. Maybe my wife is starting to rub off on me a little too much. Before you know it I won't think the gasoline fight in Zoolander wasn't funny, which by the way I find to be one of the funniest things I have ever seen in a movie.
I hope that made sense.
If you are interested in finding out new places that are trying to help independent filmmakers check out hitflics.com. There is platfrom there that is ready to help you make a name for yourself
Thanks
 
JoshL said:
Again, Kill Bill is stylized like a manga, with the intent of being a fun action movie.

Watchmen is a deconstruction of superheroes, with the intent of being a gritty film that makes you think about how super hero behaviour and characters would function in a more realistic world.

Kick Ass is a recontextualization of the glorified ultra-violence in comics, post Dark Knight Returns. With the intent of being disturbing and more than a little sickening. Setting it in a lighter world made the violence that much more extreme, with the intent of pulling you out of "yay, action movie violence" to "wait a minute, am I supposed to be ENJOYING this?" It disturbed you? It was TRYING to.

Like any good comic book nerd, I could pontificate about this for hours :-)
Click to expand...

That's another really cool way to look at it. In the end I think it's all about how YOU watched the film and with what background. Most people just watch it for the sake of watching a movie they don't care but if you really analyze the movie different people would enjoy it differently
 
CHamburger said:
...comedy... ...violence?
Click to expand...

^^^I think this whole discussion kind-of boils down to this.^^^

Should these two words be used in the same sentance?

What's funny about violence in any circumstance? Should we be laughing as Hit-Girl or The Bride slice their way through their enemies? What should we make of the graphic violence in Oldboy, when we're also treated to a freeze-frame while Dea-Su Oh lines up his target, including showing us an imaginary dotted line? What about when Jason punches somebody's head of in Friday The 13th Part 8: Jason Takes Manhatten?

Personally, I don't feel guilty for enjoying the violence in movies such as these, I don't think anybody should. Action/Horror/Thriller/Comedy are all there to be enjoyed. Some people wont like the subject matter, so they want enjoy the violence. Some people don't like gore, even if it is completely OTT.

How we as individuals feel about violence in movies should be defined, primarily, by the tone of the entire movie. Being amused by Oldboy is completely different to being amused by Schindlers List.
 
Interesting and valid points, all around. Just out of curiousity, mad_hatter, what did you think of "Funny Games"?
 
JoshL said:
...what did you think of "Funny Games"?
Click to expand...

Firstly, I have to admit I've only seen Funny Games U.S., but I believe they are both exactly the same.

As far as violence goes, it's obviously a very disturbing film. We see nothing on screen, there's very little blood through the entire movie, yet the characters, the emotions of the family, still give that horrible sense of revulsion. Yet...

I enjoyed the movie, much in the same way as I enjoyed Oldboy. I didn't laugh, or smile, or root for the killers, but the movie is so stylised, it's difficult to take seriously. The violence is horrific, but the "rule breaking" is so blatant (as it's obviously meant to be) it takes you out of the violence and makes it almost (but not quite) amusing.

It's a good movie though, I'd watch it again and I'd recommend it to people.

And the opening scene, where the operatic music switches for metal, is so unexpected it's brilliant!

Why, may I ask? What are your opinions on this movie Josh?
 
I've seen them both (and, yeah, they're pretty much shot for shot the same), and highly enjoyed them. I think I had an easier time getting suspending my disbelief, and I find it's a movie that makes me feel pretty horrible. I like the idea of questioning complicity of the viewer (Man Bites Dog does that very effectively as well, as the film crew gets drawn into the killer's crimes, and by extension, the viewer). While, as you say, it's not actually graphic, I was left with a feeling of empathic nausea for what the family was experiencing, wanting it to be more graphic because I like that sort of thing, and then feeling horribly guilt ridden for wanting that. I think it did a better job conveying the "is this REALLY what you want to watch" message than Kick Ass did, but I did find them to be thematically pretty similar, which is why I asked.

And is Tim Roth EVER bad? Man, he's awesome!

Definitely one of my favorite films that I recommend to people, but I like films that make me feel or think (preferably both). I'm going to have to watch Oldboy.
 
I've been wondering about this same question after watching "Super" and "Kick-Ass"

To me, realistic violence and comedy are a mismatch. The drive to be original is taking people in some directions that I think will later be seen as mistakes. In my mind, it's not really about any particular revulsion to violence in film, but I think you need to always remember what kind of movie you're making, and not try to throw in every movie powerchord you know. If it's a comedy, keep it funny.

Einstien once said, "The main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top