Sept 12 2007 Rhys Jones Broken Society 2/Tarantino

eleanor rathbone wrote...

I am very surprised that the Echo is promoting Tarantino's film. A newspaper that has campaigned against the anti social elements in the city, whether it be bullying or anti social behaviour getting involved with a man who has produced a figure of himself as 'rapist no 1' I think we've got a major moral blind spot here. It's O.K. because its women.

Posted by: eleanor rathbone  | September 15, 2007 1:10 AM

Martha Gelhorn wrote...

LOCAL PAPER SUPPORTS RAPE DOLL FIEND SHOCK
There was a sense of shock across Merseyside today as it was revealed that a local newspaper was actively supporting a noted sleazeball film director in his latest venture, featuring extensive violence against women and a promotional rapist doll. After an extensive investigation which involved walking down the corridor to the arts section, our reporter interviewed the right hand which was forced to admit "we suspected that the left hand was up to something unsavoury but we couldn't be sure ". The right hand went on to comment "of course it's not as if the director was on the board of Uefa"

Posted by: Martha Gelhorn  | September 15, 2007 3:15 AM

emma wood wrote...

As one of the protesters outside the Tarantino screening we had a list of questions that people might ask inside. Yes most were about violence against women - that was because the film showing had been criticised for it's misogyny and Tarantino had promoted the film with his 'rapist no 1' doll. But one of the questions was about Tarantino saying (in an interview about Kill Bill) that 'violence is fun', and what the relatives of those who'd died as a result of violent crime would think about that. Tarantino's films glorify and glamourise violence generally and his earlier films like pulp fiction and reservoir dogs could be said to glorify gang violence. One of the most disturbing things was talking to a young teenage boy who'd seen most of Tarantino's films and said 'Tarantino is a genius'. Firstly because he didn't look 18, secondly because it seemed clear to me by what he was saying that he HAD been desensitised to violence by what he'd watched. Of course a film in itself won't make someone commit murder. But Tarantino (who is very unlikely to have to live with the consequences) seems to think that violence and rape are a huge joke. They're not and that was what the protest was about.

Posted by: emma wood  | September 16, 2007 7:43 PM

Simon Taylor wrote...

I think its somewhat absurd for people to protest against this movie when they haven't even seen it yet. That is true prejudice, because they are pre-judging it.

I notice these people don't protest against films like Hostel and Saw that feature violence soley against men, so why only protest against a film where the victims are female? I think they're imagining problems where none actualy exist.

As for whether these films damage society, you'll find that countrys with less censorship generally have lower crime rates than those with with greater censorship, so that argument's non-starter. I've been a fan of horror and action films since I was 12 and have never fealt the need to wreak murder and mayhem on people with axes and chainsaws, so those who don't agree with these films should just stay away and stop trying to censor others.

Posted by: Simon Taylor  | September 17, 2007 7:58 PM

Chris wrote...

I think the protests uncover a worrying trend among some people who are unable to distinguish fiction from reality. I won’t even bother to dignify the train of logic that condemns an actor because of a character they play in a film.

There’s also a certain amount of inherent hypocrisy in the protests. Promotional material for mass murders, serial killers have been available for many mainstream movies for some time. I would say violence against *anybody* is something we should be concerned about if we are going to be, not just violence against women

A small additional point, ‘Rapist no 1’ is a character from the film ‘Planet Terror‘ (in which Tarantino is an actor not a director) it’s not from Death proof, as any of the people protesting would have known if they’d actually bothered to watch the film they have so much problem with. I’d say that was about par for the course for most ‘moral guardians’ who are only too ready to jump onto a protesting band wagon armed with theoretical prejudice rather than actual facts.

Posted by: Chris  | September 18, 2007 8:48 AM

Bunta Sugawara wrote...

If all I need to break society is a doll, I'm going to make some of Gordon Brown & his interfering Puritanical cronies & chuck them in the Mersey.

Posted by: Bunta Sugawara  | September 18, 2007 9:49 PM

Sar wrote...

Does Saw only contain violence against men? Maybe we watched a different film...

Posted by: Sar  | September 30, 2007 5:51 PM