• Welcome to the PopMalt Forums! Whether you're new to forums or a veteran, welcome to our humble home on the web! We're a 20-year old forum community with thousands of discussions on entertainment, lifestyle, leisure, and more.

    Our rules are simple. Be nice and don't spam. Registration is free, so what are you waiting for? Join today!.

It's just a videogame? It's just a movie?

Mirage

Secret Agent
Staff member
V.I.P.
When do the "it's just a videogame" or "it's just a movie" arguments stop working? People continue to get upset when violent games are glamorized and the counter argument is just "People need to realize that this is just a game". Same thing with grotesquely and graphically violent movies.

Is there a line in which entertainment crosses into brainwashing or worse or is anything done in the name of entertainment ok as long as nobody is being hurt against their will?

If yes, then where should that line be? If no, is it due to freedom of speech, or do you have other reasons?

The argument is often used that kids shouldn't view certain material because their minds aren't "ready" for it. When does the human mind become ready to watch sickening violence as a form of entertainment? Is this something that we as a society will continue stretching to the limits until we've gone back to the ages of Gladiators and torturous public executions as a sport? If computerized images are able to correctly reproduce a sickening scene of violence, what makes the spectators of the fake violence any better than the spectators of the real violence?

If an ultra realistic X/AO rated videogame came out where you played a serial killer who's goal was to capture, torture, rape, and kill as many people as possible, would such a game be ok for some people? Or perhaps a movie of the same nature?

There are people who kidnap people and film themselves torturing them for days before finally killing them. One of these people was recently tried and sentenced to death (I think). Can anybody make the argument that these people would have done this even if they never watched overly violent movies or played overly violent/sadistic videogames?

Is the phrase "it's just entertainment" a justified argument 100% of the time or should it be questioned?
 
Last edited:

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
Hybrix said:
If an ultra realistic X/AO rated videogame came out where you played a serial killer who's goal was to capture, torture, rape, and kill as many people as possible, would such a game be ok for some people? Or perhaps a movie of the same nature?
Wasn't that game called Manhunt? Didn't you spend the whole game just looking for excessively brutal ways to murder people? (like hammering a guy's testicles until he died, or something to that effect for example......)



I hate slasher films --> The ones where there is absolutely no point but dismembering people in horrifyingly graphic manners. Frankly, I think it's kinda sick that anybody actually gets anything out of it.

I've always felt that you should be free to do whatever you want on the screen (including intense violence), just so long as there is some sort of reason for it, plot or otherwise. If the whole point is to just watch people die miserably, I'm not impressed.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
It's always just a game/movie. The phrase never changes. What changes, is the society. Do media forms impact the beliefs and actions of people and children? Absolutely. However, it's these kids who are making the choices to copy them which is the parent's fault. In today's world, children must know fact from fiction, reality from fantasy and if they don't know the difference, how can they play violent or suggestive games or watch graphic movies without being severely influenced?
 

Mirage

Secret Agent
Staff member
V.I.P.
But as I mentioned in the OP, a full grown man was the one that went on a torturous serial killing spree. You mentioned children don't know the difference. So you don't think it's possible for a full grown person to want more after watching a ton of violent films? The desire to become a serial killer is one they've had for other reasons?

Surely excessively violent movies and games and other entertainment can't be taken completely out of the equation to produce the exact same results? This isn't necessarily an issue with kids. Most serial killers are full grown adults.

Do you think BTK just woke up one day after watching soap operas and decided to do what he did?
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
Do you think BTK just woke up one day after watching soap operas and decided to do what he did?
Do you honestly believe he watched Rambo shortly beforehand?

This problem shows up a lot with pedophilia. A guy will be discovered to have some child pornography on his computer (that he did not make nor was a part of) and his life is over. I'm not making a case that it should be legal, it's still pretty fucked up in my opinion but people assume that he's a rapist waiting to happen which is the wrong way to go about things.

I would have loved to have dislocated some jaws of certain individuals in the past, but I'm smart enough to know the consequences and I'm mentally calm enough to have ways of blowing off that steam without physical violence. People who do these things lack those abilities. They cannot rationalize their actions and they cannot settle problems without violence. Take for example the kid who killed his mother and shot his father in the head after they told him he could not own a copy of Halo 3. He was sixteen. Sixteen! He actually tricked his parents into closing their eyes and killed his mother point blank before attempting to do the same with his father. Then he placed the gun in his father's hands and said, "Look what you did to mom."

Electric chair. That's what someone like that is heading for. People actually tried to use this story as a way of arguing video games make people violent. The problem is, a lot of studies actually research children with previous violent histories. That's the wrong way to research. Obviously violent people will be stimulated by violence. That's like if the news headline the next day said:

NEWEST RESEARCH FINDS HAPPY PEOPLE LIKE KITTENS

It's not research and it's not news nor is it even close to being a breakthrough discovery. I see what you're trying to say Brix. The problem is, some people will be affected by violence in media forms but most will not. So what do we do? Do we remove that graphic media from society altogether? No. So what is there to do? All we can do is enforce ratings systems and rehabilitate those who are mentally ill enough to follow the "teachings" of a video game or movie. People make their own choices and are in charge of them. There's influence all around them but ultimately, people are responsible and nothing else.
 

Mirage

Secret Agent
Staff member
V.I.P.
Perhaps he didn't watch Rambo, but did he just wake up one day and decide to brutally murder people in their homes?

Well, I think most people would argue that Halo style violence isn't causing any real problems overall. My question in the OP is is there any violence or even disturbing or just sick forms of entertainment that cross the line of entertainment?

You mention child porn. So what if in the future it's possible to create it entirely with computer generated people so there "are no victims". Lolicon or whatever it's called could be used in this argument too in a way. In the future it probably will be possible to create such "entertainment" that looks so real you wouldn't be sure if it's computer generated or real. Does it suddenly become ok?

As far as I know England has already made laws against such stuff. So my question to that would be, if there are no victims in a form of entertainment, can it always be treated as strict entertainment? I'm not even saying it should or shouldn't be made illegal, which is a different argument. I'm just asking if you think there are lines in which people are maybe a little too entertained by something that they end up wanting to experience the rush they get from watching it for real?
 

AmandaBB

Registered Member
Obviously violent people will be stimulated by violence.
/agree

I doubt that violent games/movies make people violent.
You have no idea how often I've killed friends and family in games and have been killed in the most gruesome ways.
Has that made any of us violent?
Not at all.

Some people are just messed-up in the head and can't handle it and those are the ones we read about in the news.
 

PretzelCorps

Registered Member
Do you honestly believe he watched Rambo shortly beforehand?

This problem shows up a lot with pedophilia. A guy will be discovered to have some child pornography on his computer (that he did not make nor was a part of) and his life is over. I'm not making a case that it should be legal, it's still pretty fucked up in my opinion but people assume that he's a rapist waiting to happen which is the wrong way to go about things.

I would have loved to have dislocated some jaws of certain individuals in the past, but I'm smart enough to know the consequences and I'm mentally calm enough to have ways of blowing off that steam without physical violence. People who do these things lack those abilities. They cannot rationalize their actions and they cannot settle problems without violence. Take for example the kid who killed his mother and shot his father in the head after they told him he could not own a copy of Halo 3. He was sixteen. Sixteen! He actually tricked his parents into closing their eyes and killed his mother point blank before attempting to do the same with his father. Then he placed the gun in his father's hands and said, "Look what you did to mom."

Electric chair. That's what someone like that is heading for. People actually tried to use this story as a way of arguing video games make people violent. The problem is, a lot of studies actually research children with previous violent histories. That's the wrong way to research. Obviously violent people will be stimulated by violence. That's like if the news headline the next day said:

NEWEST RESEARCH FINDS HAPPY PEOPLE LIKE KITTENS

It's not research and it's not news nor is it even close to being a breakthrough discovery. I see what you're trying to say Brix. The problem is, some people will be affected by violence in media forms but most will not. So what do we do? Do we remove that graphic media from society altogether? No. So what is there to do? All we can do is enforce ratings systems and rehabilitate those who are mentally ill enough to follow the "teachings" of a video game or movie. People make their own choices and are in charge of them. There's influence all around them but ultimately, people are responsible and nothing else.
Yeah, I don't know if I'm so inclined to believe that removing all the violent movies and video games would make much of a difference in society's violence problems --> Especially considering that one could make a case that many people probably get their jollies off by indulging in said violence, and end up having better control over whatever violent urges they might have in day-to-day real life...

I'm thinking the common belief is backwards: People don't see super-violent images, then grow to like violence --> People like violence in the first place, then go to seek out super-violent images.
 

Pugz

Ms. Malone
V.I.P.
Violence is in human nature, we've all had that urge to beat someone into a bloody pulp with the nearest blunt object; thankfully the majority of people can control that urge but a small number don't have that ability and could be negitivly stimulated by violent games/movies. It doesn't mean violent games/movies are bad in general it's just that some people can't quieten that little voice.
 

Merc

Problematic Shitlord
V.I.P.
Perhaps he didn't watch Rambo, but did he just wake up one day and decide to brutally murder people in their homes?
There's always an explanation and this is no exception. No offense Hybrix, but the assumption that there's just some button that goes off is the problem with the system. Well, I guess you're not arguing that so I'm assuming you'll agree with me. When you assume that people have some switch that turns them into psychopaths, you return to the early 20th century and the study of criminal brains, which nobody should believe.

Well, I think most people would argue that Halo style violence isn't causing any real problems overall. My question in the OP is is there any violence or even disturbing or just sick forms of entertainment that cross the line of entertainment?
Sometimes it does I'd say. However, that's why we have ratings systems because they inform us of the content of such media forms.

You mention child porn. So what if in the future it's possible to create it entirely with computer generated people so there "are no victims". Lolicon or whatever it's called could be used in this argument too in a way. In the future it probably will be possible to create such "entertainment" that looks so real you wouldn't be sure if it's computer generated or real. Does it suddenly become ok?
It's not future technology, it's out there. Digital and in doll form (yes, nasty I agree). There are no victims and thus, no crime. If someone can get punished for having animated child porn, then almost the entire world is going to jail for murder since almost all of us have played video games that entail it at some point or another during our lives. It doesn't make the act itself "okay", all it does is take away the harm it would be doing to real people. It's the same concept behind people who play violent games to vent (like myself). Rather than be a violent person, I have my ways of outing that steam. Personally, I'd probably kill myself if I ever harmed another human being to the point of death because I'd have so much guilt.

As far as I know England has already made laws against such stuff. So my question to that would be, if there are no victims in a form of entertainment, can it always be treated as strict entertainment? I'm not even saying it should or shouldn't be made illegal, which is a different argument. I'm just asking if you think there are lines in which people are maybe a little too entertained by something that they end up wanting to experience the rush they get from watching it for real?
How can one be "too entertained" by something? That sounds a bit awkward if you ask me.
 
Top