All screenplays on the simplyscripts.com and simplyscripts.net domain are copyrighted to their respective authors. All rights reserved. This screenplaymay not be used or reproduced for any purpose including educational purposes without the expressed written permission of the author.
In light of the recent Colorado shooting spree, James Homes was clearly influenced by the Joker. Obviously there's more to it than just that. But the bottom line this isn't the first time a lunatic's gone on a murderous rampage imitating something he's seen on TV or film.
So, my question is this -- anybody feel the need to be a bit more selective and responsible as to what you put on the page, lest it gets produced into a film and some pshycho watches it and decides to imitate it?
What these guys do doesn't influence what I write. They've had a fucked up upbringing in one way or another and look to pop culture as an excuse to give their actions meaning.
Just my take, but I'm not exactly known for my emotional responses. I look at facts and the facts I see are that this was a message, pure and simple.
Society may have a certain responsibility and I believe writers are in that category. That said, a man’s predisposition to violence is one as steeped in history as the great pyramids.
Batman didn’t make the sad bastard do what he did, IMO.
The urge to kill did.
Sure, they will weave a tale stating his delusional tendencies and tack them to a movie, but the dirty underbelly of humanity is such that murder feeds. Murder is the ultimate God move as a human and murder is something only one in a million people dare to step across and experience.
Usually, the act itself isn’t lived out anywhere near the fantasy. In fact, most of the time, in confession, a murderer will tell you, they hardly remember it.
The movie is a scapegoat. Society wants to “box in” a reason why he did it. Fact is, he simply wanted to murder and found an avenue for which to fill out that urge.
Speaking for myself, I guess I do feel a certain sense of responsibility not to add any more violence to an already violent world. I recently saw the film "God Bless America", and frightenly related to the protag's plight. Of course he only killed people who deserved it. Reality TV stars, politicians, people who talk on their cell phones during a movie. Not that, that makes it any better.
In any event, we as screenwriters clearly have the ability to influence this world in a good way as well as the bad. The recent tragedy in Colorado makes me suddenly more conscious of what kind of vibes I choose to send out with my writing. Still, it's not easy.
Writing violence can be so much fun. But it can also have devestating consequences.
Let's all write family friendly fare for the Lifetime network!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was simply asking for your "personal" thought on the subject". Sarcasm really isn't necessary.
But on a serious note, I suppose if one of your family members was a victim of the Colorado shooting you might have a different response to the proposed question. Not trying to start a heated debate. Just sayin'...
Ah, I knew this would come to the discussion boards, eventually.
I think that the movies have nothing to do with the shooting. I think it all has to do with the way the guy was brought up, the society he grew up in and the people surrounding him. Not to mention the fact that any wackjob in America can buy a gun (at least that's my understanding of the law over there. Not too sure.). James Holmes is clearly mentally unstable, which I feel is the major contributor to the shootings.
But on a serious note, I suppose if one of your family members was a victim of the Colorado shooting you might have a different response to the proposed question. Not trying to start a heated debate. Just sayin'...
...no.
According to you anyone who writes or comments on anything, novels, screenplays, blogs whatever should think twice about what they write because some idiot out there might want to act it out.
According to you anyone who writes or comments on anything, novels, screenplays, blogs whatever should think twice about what they write because some idiot out there might want to act it out.
This isn't about "according to me". This is about a recent event. And I'm talking strictly about movies, which as you already know, starts with a screenplay. It only takes one spark to light a fuse. And there's a lot of short fuses walking around out there. Again, not trying to start a heated debate. Just looking for personal beliefs, thoughts and opinions on the subject.
I personally, in both my writing and in the films I prefer, have no problem with violence, but tend to have a problem with senseless violence. The whole torture porn thing. First of all, senseless violence is lazy, cheap story telling. Yes, watching a cute girl have her throat sliced gets a reaction out of an audience. But what kind of talent does it take for that?
I think it's reasonable to feel some sense of responsibility in what we write, or what is filmed. I don't know where that line is, and I'm really not going to suggest how anyone should draw it. I'll merely say that it's a good thing if one at least has a hint of a conscious about their contribution to the collective intellectual and moral stew of our time.
People have been comitting acts of violence, murder, torture throughout the ages, long before printed or filmed media were available. Mal adjusted individuals will align themeselves with whatever violence they can identify with, be it a film or a tiger mauling it's prey.
A writer has a voice and a responsibility. Sometimes we should show what is morally right and sometimes what is morally wrong and the consequences of those actions.
The morally questionable stuff that is protrayed as 'normal' in day time soap, is far more damaging than the violence protrayed in films.
If people look to film as their moral compass, that says alot about society and parenting.
PS: Out of respect for those who lost their lives, I also think you should retitle this thread something like 'The Responsibility of the Writer'. That would be your first responsibility . . .
I think it's reasonable to feel some sense of responsibility in what we write, or what is filmed. I don't know where that line is, and I'm really not going to suggest how anyone should draw it. I'll merely say that it's a good thing if one at least has a hint of a conscious about their contribution to the collective intellectual and moral stew of our time.
A writer has a voice and a responsibility. Sometimes we should show what is morally right and sometimes what is morally wrong and the consequences of those actions.
The morally questionable stuff that is protrayed as 'normal' in day time soap, is far more damaging than the violence protrayed in films.
If people look to film as their moral compass, that says alot about society and parenting.
Well said.
PS - Eoin, not sure if I agree with your suggestion to change the title of this thread, but so be it.
Film is just one ingredient of the concoction that influences our societal values: video games, church, school, the news, your parents. And as I said, I make no suggestion on where or how to draw a line. For example, Batman attempts a distinction between good and evil, and even the hero has sworn off using guns. If one wants to portray good in film, then one has to portray evil, and the more starkly it is portrayed, the sharper the distinction between the two.
Wherever one's line is, as writers we'll probably cross it, and maybe often. I'm just proposing that when we do, a slight twinge of conscience about it will be a healthy thing.
While the person may have called himself the Joker and identified himself with the movie, the specific incident never appeared in any of the Batman films (including the four that started with Tim Burton's). True, there is considerable violence, and since he identified with the Joker, it could be said he was emulating the character, as opposed to any situation.
The Joker (as presented in The Dark Knight) called himself an agent of chaos and had no plan for anything. He just wanted to watch the world burn. I suppose with what we know at this point, that seems pretty accurate. But to be honest, he screwed it up. I cannot see the character of the Joker doing what he did. I would never write the Joker blasting up a movie theatre. Doesn't make sense for him.
The Joker would have coordinated a multi-theatre blast-up with threatening warnings in the news about 15-30 minutes before the film started prompting a nationwide exodus of all theatres. That's more Joker-like. What he did? That's more like one of his goons who will be shot later for screwing it up.
Anyway, as writers, we write things that are morally reprehensible, but think about the whole story. How many stories with morally reprehensible content actually condone the actions that are wrong? Not many. Even the Batman movies do not support violence against innocents, so to blame his actions on the movies would mean he didn't even watch the whole movie or get the point.
If we go into writer responsibility, one of the fundamental points of writing any story is to say something. What sort of point are you making when you sit down to write this? That goes for anything you write from screenplays to posts on a message board. You say everything you say for a purpose. When we write out entire plots that we hope someone will spend 90-120 minutes of their life watching, we say more than just LOL (most of the time). We also don't let the bad guy win (also most of the time). We do our best to plot out a story that people can relate to and support and doing that means that they can relate to our main character and believe in our ending and theme of the work. The last thing we would expect is for someone to look at our villain and say "wow, I want to be just like him."
Really? You looked at my dude who I made the worst kind of person and decided you wanted to be the worst kind of person? You would have to be mentally unstable to want to be characters like Jason Voorhees, Jigsaw, any of the arch-villains from super hero and James Bond flicks, or even the two bit ones like Biff Tannen. Dramas grey the lines a little more, but seriously, who left the theatre after Titanic wanting to be Rose's ex-fiancee?
Yes, there are a good number of films where the "heroes" are not nice people (cough, Godfather), but for the most part, the movies that are really violent still either let the good guy win or they do not support tell the audience that what is going on is the right thing to do. The Strangers lets the bad guys win, but you spend the film rooting for the people in the house and are supposed to be sad when they lose. (I apologize if that is a spoiler for anyone, but if you haven't seen it yet, I figure you're not going to).
Yes, movies contain violence, but so does life. You can find lots of movies with violence, but you'll find just as many that don't send the message that "this is the way to act." Write what you want to write. There will always be freaks. As long as you didn't encourage it, I think you're fine.
Now, as a side note, I did read an article where there was going to be a trailer for the Dark Knight Rises where four guys "emerged" from behind the movie screen and fired into the audience. Understandably, they pulled that one from every outlet immediately. Can't find it even on YouTube anymore. That would be the responsibility you're looking for. After 9/11, multiple movie plots involving the World Trade Center towers were changed (even those that had been shot and finished).
Take Dreamscale's "Fade to White" for example. If it were ever to get produced, God only knows what kind of gun-toting nutjob that film might churn out. Sorry, Dreamscale, just using it as an example.
To me in Fade the hammer and the fire poker was much scarier than the guns!
Ah, so not a trailer for the Dark Knight Rises, but for the Gangster Squad. The article I read did not specify that it was a separate movie, but implied it was actually for Rises. There's that confusion cleared up...
This is just like what I mentioned up there with what happened after 9/11. The Spiderman right after that originally had a scene where he strung a web between the towers, and I think it was a Men in Black that originally had a rocket or something hiding in one. Both changed. Hollywood is probably too sensitive about current events, but I suppose we should be grateful they are.
But the trailer definitely had to go. That would have been uncool.
I think George and Kevin both make very good points above. The responsibility of the writer, in my view, is to be writing something for a reason. Of course, that could be any reason, up to and including inspiring people to kill each other, if that's what you wanna do -- ideally, though, one would write either to make the world a better place, to say something honest about it, or to entertain without reinforcing negative values.
In my opinion, Nolan's Batman films (haven't seen Rises, going off the first two here) are attempting to say something honest about the world. To me, the content and breadth of the arguments in Dark Knight validate the violence.
As for the shooting itself, who cares? In 2010 there were 8,775 gun homicides in the States (in Canada, 173 in 2009 -- keep in mind the respective population sizes). Suddenly, 12 in a movie theatre, and we care? Bullshit. It's a saleable story for the media, and that's where the majority of our culture take their cues on what's important.
(That last isn't directed at anyone here -- more at the simpering fops that have flooded my Facebook feed with inane discussion and hollow lamentation).
You can't blame Nolan or Heath Ledger..... The Joker was around for decades before them.
I also heard he didn't watch any of the Nolan films, and was just a psycho, period.
Btw, we also go to the movies to escape shit like that..... and instead it just follows us into the theaters. It almost makes you feel like you are never safe now.
How could you have heard he didn't watch any Nolan films? He had batman stuff in his apartment. Doesn't mean he saw the films, but it would be pretty surprising if he didn't. I'm not saying the films cause the problem. This a mentally unstable person. Something else would have triggered it sooner or later.
Chris, there are a lot of killings in the US, but few like this. Most are gang related. There are innocent victims, but it's gang related. It has nothing to do with a story being "saleable". The idea that you can be sitting in a movie theater with your loved ones and then be trapped and assaulted by a guy like that is pretty horrifying.
BTW, those other killings, the gang ones: people care about those too. It's just no one really knows what to do about them. And let's not debate it here, because that would be off topic. But where I am, they are all reported in the news, people care, but no one has answers. Gun control may or may not be a solution, but the problem is caused by something entirely different.
In light of the recent Colorado shooting spree, James Homes was clearly influenced by the Joker. Obviously there's more to it than just that. But the bottom line this isn't the first time a lunatic's gone on a murderous rampage imitating something he's seen on TV or film.
So, my question is this -- anybody feel the need to be a bit more selective and responsible as to what you put on the page, lest it gets produced into a film and some pshycho watches it and decides to imitate it?
Take Dreamscale's "Fade to White" for example. If it were ever to get produced, God only knows what kind of gun-toting nutjob that film might churn out. Sorry, Dreamscale, just using it as an example.
Any thoughts?
I have never written anything that, if produced, would be anything less than rated 'R'. And I mean hard 'R'. More likely NC-17 going by the MPAA system. It might even not get rated if filmed. I'm English so that translates to our 18 rating, possibly with cuts.
Here's the thing -- what have the recent Batman movies been? PG13? How in the hell do you administrate self-censorship yet still have story/themes/ideas that are interesting and suitable for a 'grown up' audience?
Alot of it is just blown out of proportion by the media as always, the same thing happened with that one incident and the media marked marilyn manson as being the cause of the shootings. They just want to have something to blame it on so the can pretend to known what the reasoning was behind it even if it has nothing to do with it. In any case its never because of a movie that someone goes on a rampage or shooting like that, theres always something that happened in their life that would have caused them to do that. The only time a movie or game or something of the matter could be blamed as the cause is when its a kid that dosent completely understand the difference between right or wrong or that its just a movie or game... even then its not the movie or games fault or the writers of it. It falls apon the parents to take responsibility to monitor what their kid does, plays, watch and ect. But when something usually occurs of that nature the parents and media which causes alot of society that cant think for themselves to blame the creators of the content instead of taking responsiblility themselves for buying the game for thier 6yr old that has a M rating on it with out bothering to view it them selves and deem weather its appropriate for thier kid or not. But even if the kid who shot up the theater wrote notes saying that he is being just like the joker there is going to be some other benefactor in his life that would cause it, abuse, bulling, drug use ect ect the reasons go on. So I really dont think the writer should take responsibility for something that most likely has anything to do with them or their content.
Troublesome to me is the fact that there were parents there with a 6 yo kid and a baby. This was a midnight showing and I doubt it's a suitable film for a kid and I imagine the loud sound being less than great for a baby...
Chris, there are a lot of killings in the US, but few like this. Most are gang related. There are innocent victims, but it's gang related. It has nothing to do with a story being "saleable". The idea that you can be sitting in a movie theater with your loved ones and then be trapped and assaulted by a guy like that is pretty horrifying.
BTW, those other killings, the gang ones: people care about those too. It's just no one really knows what to do about them. And let's not debate it here, because that would be off topic. But where I am, they are all reported in the news, people care, but no one has answers. Gun control may or may not be a solution, but the problem is caused by something entirely different.
I agree that the idea of being trapped in that theatre is horrifying...that's why I refer to it as saleable. I'm more likely to die of diarrhea, or in a car accident, or completely unexpectedly and unintentionally, than I am to be shot by someone. Certainly many are much, much, much more likely to die from diseases caused by the way they eat. As unpleasant as death by diarrhea would be, though, it's not particularly saleable...it can't incite fear from a newspaper article (or for me it wouldn't, anyway), and it can't be a spooky story to tell one's friends. Fear is saleable, and it's fairly clear that the things we choose to be afraid of have little to do with the things that are most likely to cause us harm.
That's what I mean when I say people don't really care -- if they did, they'd A) worry about the things that are most likely to kill them, like their diets and their cars; and B) actively work to solve the specific issue in whatever way they saw fit, by fighting for stronger or weaker gun control, or a complete gun ban, or a complete lifting of all gun control, or whatever. I'm sure people have an emotional reaction -- it's hard not to, as the story is, yes, horrifying. But like most of the things that temporarily upset people in the world, that emotional reaction, I suspect, won't be transformed into action.
There's no accounting for the way someones brain is wired, or the emotional, relationship or other stimuli responsible for a person committing such an awful act.
This really isn't a forum for debating gun law issues. You could argue an equally valid case for pro and anti.
Ireland has some of the strictest gun control in the world. That didn't stop some nut from jumping into a bus and mowing people over.
It's never the weapon, or the character from a movie someone identified with, it's always the individual.
Chris, I use the word gang as kind of a coverall for inner city and involving certain demographic groups. It is what it is. If someone could convince me of a way to solve it, I would dedicate a percentage of my pay for the rest of my life. But midnight basketball ain't gonna do it. I've never seen anything that will even make a difference. Maybe a time machine that can let is go back and undo history. Culture is a huge determiner of behavior, and culture is a product of historical forces.
And I think people of common sense understand this, and get frustrated trying to think about the problem. Because there is no solution. The huge programs that have been tried since the 1960s not only did not work, but they made things exponentially worse.
That's the thing with the theater murders. People want to do something, but there really, from what's come out so far, isn't much anyone could have done. I think Eoin is right. This guy would have found a way to do something similar. Especially considering his intelligence. We're lucky he didn't blow up the theater.
I agree with your comments about culture as a product of historical forces. Personally, though, from that I would conclude that we have a lot of opportunities to change the immediate problem by changing culture. I think we are doing this -- in Canada gun violence and homicides have been decreasing steadily; I'm not sure about the States? Maybe all we can hope for is slow progress (if indeed we are making progress; I'm not sure). But then, perhaps this places more responsibility than ever on us writers -- as creators of popular culture, perhaps ideally we should be working actively to make arguments against what we find lamentable in the world.
Eoin,
I don't mean to argue for or against gun control. All I'm saying is that the violence/deaths/tragedies that people choose to care about are very inconsistent, and in my opinion, more related to what the media finds to be a viable story than anything else.
Regarding "never the weapon, always the individual," though, I'd personally be more tempted to place blame on cultures than individuals. The ludicrously high (for an affluent nation) level of gun violence in the United States, even when compared to countries with much more relaxed gun laws, suggests to me that you're right to say laws don't have a ton to do with it, but wrong to say that it's always the individual; otherwise, the U.S. seems to have very bad luck with its individuals. Countries like South Africa and El Salvador also, to me, suggest the influence of culture and circumstance over the actions of the individual.
So, again, maybe we take on a massive responsibility as creators of culture.
This kind of shit has been going on forever with music, movies, and even cable TV. Is the writer or creator to blame?
HELL NO! It's ludicrous to even contemplate it.
But here's something that's also ludicrous, and actually should be blamed.
Batman and the like are aimed at the masses and are guaranteed blockbusters. Guaranteed blockbusters are not going to be R rated, because that would cut their BO revenue way down. So, "they" go ahead and write these ultra violent movies, film these ultra violent movies, and release them to the masses, almost as if it's perfectly OK and normal to see hundreds, or thousands of peeps getting brutally killed.
It's complete horseshit and to me, actually quite appalling.
A hard R rated horror script or movie is a different beast altogether. It's not aimed at the masses. It's marketed as exactly what it is (hopefully).
I've always been so confused when I see feedback or reviews on horror movies, where they say how appalling it is, how violent, how it's in such bad taste and has no place in this lovely world we live in. Really? For reals? C'mon now...
Check out the highest grossing films of all time (and throw out the animated ones) and tell me what they all share. Wait...I'll tell you what they all share - lots of death, lots of killing, lots of violence.
There will always be whackjobs out there who will relate to this or that and then use this or that for their reasoning when they go off the deep end. They are to blame, not someone who created something for entertainment.
Probably would've been better just to pose this question more as a "yes" or "no" poll.
The original question was - "Do you as a screenwriter feel the need to be a bit more selective and responsible as to what you put on the page, lest it gets produced into a film and some pshycho watches it and decides to imitate it?"
With the exception of 3 yesses, the "general consesus" is no. Or in Dreamscale's case, HELL NO.
My opinion will not be swayed, as I definitely do no buy into the belief that what someone creates, can or should be used against them, when some nutjob goes off.
Should we blame that freak Tom Sixx if someone goes and kidnaps 12 innocent peeps and surgically connects them anus to mouth? I don't think so.
My opinion will not be swayed, as I definitely do no buy into the belief that what someone creates, can or should be used against them, when some nutjob goes off.
Should we blame that freak Tom Sixx if someone goes and kidnaps 12 innocent peeps and surgically connects them anus to mouth? I don't think so.
It's absurd, IMO.
I wouldn't exactly call it absurd. I mean ultimately what we're talking about here is the moral compass of society. It's off kilter and getting worse by the day.
Do we as screenwriter/filmmakers have the ability to change the tide to some degree? Of course we do, IMO.
I'm gonna hopefully bow out of this discusssion from here on out, being that I have a script to wwrite and need to focus. But it's been a very interesting topic.
I guess Volta and, to a lesser degree, Franklin are responsible for every death caused by electrocution than... Since they found ways to harness electricity. Those diabolical pricks!
Absolutely not -- No movie, song, book, comic, piece of art or video game should ever be to blame for the actions of one man/woman. Then again, Charles Manson never killed anyone and yet we found him to be more guilty than the guilty party involved.
In america you are always guilty until proven innocent and it seems entertaining forms of media and creative arts are under heavy attack by the left wing.
No movie, song, book, comic, piece of art or video game should ever be to blame for the actions of one man/woman.
An average American child will see 200,000 violent acts and 16,000 murders on TV by age 18.
I'd say it's fair to make the statement we're "part" to blame. And when I say we, I mean screenwriters and filmmakers. Sure there's many other factors involved. But to say media doesn't influence the masses is crazy, IMO.
An average American child will see 200,000 violent acts and 16,000 murders on TV by age 18.
I'd say it's fair to make the statement we're "part" to blame. And when I say we, I mean screenwriters and filmmakers. Sure there's many other factors involved. But to say media doesn't influence the masses is crazy, IMO.
Wouldn't you say that's something that parents should be responsible for if it's such a concern to them rather than placing blame/responsibility on someone else?
Don't get me wrong, guys. I'm not trying to stand on a soap box here. I'm just as guilty as the rest when it comes to writing violent content in my stories. But there's a fine line. Anyways, the original question I posted seems to have gotten muddled in translation. I'm almost sorry I brought it up. But I stick to my conviction. Visual media is definitely part to blame in today's screwed up society.
We as screenwriter/filmmakers should be more responsible, or at least, aware of what kind of vibes we're sending out, because eventually it's gonna come back to bite us in the rear. You can agree or disagree but it doesn't change the fact. That's all.
Wouldn't you say that's something that parents should be responsible for if it's such a concern to them rather than placing blame/responsibility on someone else?
Good one Greg!!
I remember films being brought up to blame in the past too. Like Natural Born Killers for example which in my opinion is a master piece. A perfect satirical look at society at the time...and maybe even more fitting today where being infamous is just as good as being famous. You don't have to achieve anything. As long as you're known to the dumb...masses, you're cool. The Matrix has been blamed too, along with many other films.
Like I said earlier, maybe we should all just aim to write family friendly fair for the LifeTime network.
PS. I just heard today that some hotel chain is replacing the Gideons Bible in every room with the novel Fifty Shades of Grey...
Visual media is definitely part to blame in today's screwed up society.
IMO news media is more to blame for today's screwed up society because people base their beliefs on what a reporter tells them using quotes from Twitter.
But maybe that's not relevant for this debate.
Also IMO today's screwed up society is relative considering that in Roman times they used to fill massive arenas to watch people fight to the death. I like to think we've at least progressed some.
Also IMO today's screwed up society is relative considering that in Roman times they used to fill massive arenas to watch people fight to the death. I like to think we've at least progressed some.
Maybe not as many people as you think that sleep in those hotels read the bible before they go to bed...
Looks like this thread's heading toward the topics of sex, politics and religion.
Where's a mod when ya need one?
Please remember the spirit in which this thread was intended. It was mostly out of respect and concern for those who lost their lives in a very tragic event.
An average American child will see 200,000 violent acts and 16,000 murders on TV by age 18.
When I owned a private investigative company, one of my primary functions in investigating cases I was hired to cover, was the documentation of forensic trauma pertaining to the accidental and purposeful demise pertaining to a corpse.
More often than not, my investigations were of homicide and suicide cases.
What you see and sense in a morgue, far exceeds the violence on any screen.
I mean this with all respect for those in the field I worked with. I don’t remember hearing lately of a mortician, pathologist, coroner, funeral director or anyone involved in any of these fields committing horrible acts against humanity.
And I've personally known hundreds of them.
To say exposure to violence could possibly be a precursor to murder is absurd.
The person is either fucked in the head or he isn’t.
To say exposure to violence could possibly be a precursor to murder is absurd.
Actually it's exposre to violece in "visual media". In any event I'm done beating this dead horse. The topic kinda went sideways. We can all agree that we disagree.
I'm sorry most people seem to disagree with you. You're still welcome here though and there are plenty of people who would agree with you. Most of us here have just agreed that we avoid certain subjects to keep the big arguments at bay. That's all.
PS. I'm a PETA member and I don't like beating any animal. Dead or alive.
I'm sorry most people seem to disagree with you. You're still welcome here though and there are plenty of people who would agree with you. Most of us here have just agreed that we avoid certain subjects to keep the big arguments at bay. That's all.
PS. I'm a PETA member and I don't like beating any animal. Dead or alive.
I could care less who agrees or disagrees with me. It's not about me. You missed the point completely. You can avoid subjects all you want and I'm sorry if it made youn feel uncomfortable. As for me, I'd much rather swim upstream and opposed to down. Have a glorious day.
I did not miss it. I'm just commenting without causing firestorms at SS.
Your initial comment to this subject was sarcastic and somewhat snide. Or at least I perceived it that way. Then again I don't really know you so maybe that's just your style, for lack of a better word. No worries.
Hey, M.Alexander...I thought you said like 45 posts ago you were all done with the thread you started? What happened? For some odd reason, you literally questioned me and a script I wrote. I'm confused here.
Should we all try to write for Lifetime or the like? Is there no place any longer for murder and mayhem?
Hey, M.Alexander...I thought you said like 45 posts ago you were all done with the thread you started? What happened? For some odd reason, you literally questioned me and a script I wrote. I'm confused here.
Should we all try to write for Lifetime or the like? Is there no place any longer for murder and mayhem?
I used your script as a mere example. I'm pretty sure sure you'll get over it.
I used your script as a mere example. I'm pretty sure sure you'll get over it.
PS - You're welcome for the plug, Jeff.
I understand completely and I do appreciate any and all plugs, but my point is still that you started the thread, you didn't like the opinions you received, and then you said you were bowing out - but you didn't.
Brett, I remember watching about her and her ideas on 60 minutes or 20/20 or one of those shows years ago. Btw, if I quit writing one day, one of my other ideas I always wanted to give a try is to become a turkey farmer. Free range of course. Weird, I know!
I remember writing a horror that had some torturous moments in it "cough", but I justified it by all the victims being child molesters/rapists and that sort.
I understand completely and I do appreciate any and all plugs, but my point is still that you started the thread, you didn't like the opinions you received, and then you said you were bowing out - but you didn't.
Seriously? That's your beef here? You're pretending to miss the point. Nice try. And Pia you should do something about that cough. Sounds like you're sick.
Apparently the spirit in which this thread was intended has officially been derailed. Even a mod's joining in on the hijinks. Way to go, bern.
Once started, it is impossible to control the destiny of any thread. Have you not seen some of the train wrecks around here? As if this crowd would actually listen to me, anyway. It is herding kittens, man.
The thread's author -- and yes, even mods -- will often stand helpless in the steam-roller path of inertia, unchecked chaos, and random smartasses.
And, yes, it is completely against the rules for me to have any fun at all. Ever.
In light of the recent Colorado shooting spree, James Homes was clearly influenced by the Joker. Obviously there's more to it than just that. But the bottom line this isn't the first time a lunatic's gone on a murderous rampage imitating something he's seen on TV or film.
So, my question is this -- anybody feel the need to be a bit more selective and responsible as to what you put on the page, lest it gets produced into a film and some pshycho watches it and decides to imitate it?
Why the writer? Why not the director, the actors, or the producers? Why does the responsibility go to the writer? What about DC comics?
I can't control other people or how my work might influence them. If we had so much power as that, wouldn't there be massacres at every drop of a hat?
Influencing the audience is always a possibility no matter what you put on the page, but the responsibility begins with the individual who makes the CHOICE to act upon it.
I take responsibility for my script but none for the actions someone takes as a result of my script. I get sick of people not taking responsibility for their actions. That's my simple version.
The problem with responsibility is that it is never one dimensional, whether it is on a personal level or societal. Responsibility, displayed on a graph from A to Z, has many components to it and is left to interpretation every step of the way. The old adage of: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts” is true and therefore to believe that one cog in the machine of responsibility can change the outcome is impossible if not down right ridiculous.
For clarification, and the rise of this argument, I can name many factors more responsible than that of the writer. But let’s just focus on a few because the rest is just more affirmation of the argument.
When it comes to responsibility of what is disseminated into the public consciousness one only needs turn to the TV that runs non-stop in the average American household with 1,000’s of ADD inducing channels and programs.
The TV is the gateway of the masses, a connection to the world around them. But even deeper still, as far as responsibility goes, are the rating boards that decided what can be viewed and by what age group.
And the buffer between the two? (because there is always a buffer or should be)
Parental responsibility.
I see shows on TV for kids and teens that, while unquestionably entertaining, have inappropriate content AND context. Look at much of our “Reality TV” and tell me young impressionable minds aren’t finding their role models and modes of behaviour in the wrong place.
Some might want to point the finger at mental problems but that has no place in this argument as it is an “unknown variable” and does not rear its head until it is too late for anything to be done about it. That is why when these events happen it is so shocking and leaves us asking, Why? and Who is to blame? If history has taught us anything, there MUST be a scapegoat. A finger MUST be pointed to help us make sense of the senseless.
The problem with this is, just like responsibility, a finger can not be pointed in only one direction because all the sums that make up that whole are too innumerable.
The other problem with responsibility is where it comes from. Where does it come from? It comes from the pesky thing known as perception. The perception we have on most of our beliefs that are developed over years of developmental environments and paved by societal norms. What this means is that perception while differ from person to person, continent to continent, ideology to ideology, ad naseum. This brings us finally to our topic of the writer’s responsibility.
I think that most people here would agree writing is an art form. Not only in the form, structure and format of our words but the worlds it creates that provide what humans have craved, if not needed since our earliest known history on planet earth. Entertainment! I can’t imagine a world without it and we have all those artists to thank over the centuries for staving off the insanity a banal life would produce.
Where would we be if every one of those artists, whether it be poet or musician, painter or inventor, philosopher or scientist, if before they started their work thought, “What if my art upsets or offends someone?” I am sure almost none of them did because to be true to yourself, true to your art, and in this case true to your story IS the responsibility.
There are no clear cut answers but that… be true. How anyone else may or may not interpret your work can not be your basis for art because all you will have left is a censured shadow of what art should be. I could never feel good about that, but then again, this is only MY perception.
I partially want to open this back up if this thread is dead, due to that anti-Islam film "Innocence of Muslims" that is causing so much trouble lately. I would have to say that I dont think the writer should take responsibility for something that has nothing to do with them or their content but in the case that it is caused by its content and message one should take full responsibility. In this case the maker of the film in a news article went out and stated that he made the video to show islam as a hateful religion upon other things and of course everything is so back and forth from politics now but I think something like this the writer should take full responsibility when doing something so rash and stupid.
What you are talking about and the topic of discussion are two completely different things. We create fiction, albiet sometimes against the backdrop of real world issues, while this guy made an incendiary documentary meant to invoke response or reaction.
IMHO This isn't art. It's hate propoganda against an entire culture in the guise of supposed truth.
Pages: 
Author
Responsibility of the Writer
Logged
Locked Board