Tarantino on Movie Violence

Tweet

Today, I lost respect for Quentin Tarantino.  I have been a fan of his for a long time, not just the films he made as director, but even those where he just has a writing credit.  True Romance is actually probably one of my favourite Tarantino movies.  I even enjoyed his cameos in From Dusk Till Dawn, and a brief stint on TV show Alias.

The only Tarantino film I have yet to see is Django Unchained, and now I may not bother at all.

What changed my opinion?  This interview.

For any British readers, there's no need to introduce Krishnan Guru-Murthy, but for anyone else he is a well-respected Channel 4 newsreader.  No doubt, he has earned even more respect after that interview.

If you don't have time to watch the clip, the interview took a nose-dive off a cliff when Guru-Murthy invites Tarantino to share his opinion on the connection between movie violence and real-life violence.

Now I understand that Tarantino has been asked this question before.  It appears from previous interviews that his opinion is that there is not any connection at all.  However, I have yet to hear him give a reasoned explanation for why he believes that this, he generally seems content to simply brush off the question and state that there isn't a connection.

Additionally, the question was asked in a timely manner, considering the recent Sandy Hook School shooting.  Guru-Murthy was in the process of conducting an interesting and enjoyable interview, packed with good and insightful questions.  But the moment he asks the question about movie violence and real violence, Tarantino seems to melt down on camera and rather loses the plot.  You can read the full transcript online if you wish, but one of the first comments that he makes in response is to announce that "I refuse the question" and goes on to claim that "I'm not your slave and you're not my master... I'm not a monkey".

Wow.

When Guru-Murthy challenges him by asking "So you don't want to talk about anything serious?", Tarantino again refuses. Moments later he comes out with a line that will surely haunt him for years to come since it appears so childish and insolent "I'm shutting your butt down" and makes his attitude abundantly clear by further confirming "This is a commercial for my movie".

Whilst Guru-Murthy remains ice-cool throughout the interview, attempting to open up some interesting discussion for the fans to watch, Tarantino retreats further, sulking like an obstinate adolescent.  His "head in the sand" approach may have just lost him some fans.

And since you refuse to spell out the connection, Quentin, allow me the honour of doing it for you.

Yes, there is a connection between real violence and movie violence.

That's not to say that everyone who ever watches a violent movie will go out and commit the same violence seen on screen.  Most of the time, it will only impact those who already have violent tendencies.  The connection is that it can and will encourage what already exists.  Movies (or any art form) do not usually create violence where none exists, but it will feed the fire.

Consider the opposite scenario for a moment.

Picture the scene where a good, kind, charitable person sees a news report about some natural disaster that causes many to lose their homes, or sees an advert about some similar need. If they decide to do something practical to help, by volunteering their time, or donating money, it is not that the news report or advert has created their good character, but it has influenced the specific actions they have taken, which otherwise they would never have done.

As people, we are far more easily influenced than we like to think.  Our actions are a product of our thoughts.  Therefore anything that affects our thoughts (as movies do) can also affect our actions.  To deny that is either naivete or deliberate rebellion against truth because it doesn't happen to suit us.