[magprob]

LOL!! How you know that??? You sound like my missus.

I could just tell by the tone of your voice.

[excon]

Hello again:

Work with me here, people.

You know I smoke marijuana. Having mentioned that I do, do you then think I'm "promoting" its use? Were I to write a story about my history with pot, would that story "encourage" people to use drugs? Or would it just be a story?

I just want to know how YOU think?

excon

[NeedKarma]

If I identify with you and think that you're a 'cool guy' then my perception might me that it's acceptable. Well that was my thinking when I was 13, today I'm immune to peer pressure - it's nice.

[tomder55]

I would think that would depend on how the story was told by you and by the Hollywood maker of the movie.

Did you see the movie directed by Clint Eastwood starring Hillary Swank called 'Million Dollar Babies'. Just a boxing movie right ? Or was there also a message supporting euthenasia inherent in the plot also ?

During it's time the 'Breakfast Club ' was a very popular and influential "coming of age " film. It depicted a bunch of students with little in common;all from a different clique or social group, serving detention in the same class room. However ;after they all sat down with a joint they managed to overcome their differences and bond .
As you know ;the careers of Sean Penn and Matthew McConaughey were launched performing in "stoner" roles.

The reality is that movies are more influential than you think. Why is it that the nuclear industry stalled to a standstill after the movie "The China Syndrome" was made ?

[excon]

Hello again, tom:

I'm sorry. I don't see it. I just don't.

I think you let the cat out of the bag, though. As long as the story depicts a viewpoint that YOU agree with, it ISN'T somebody manipulating the public. But, if you don't like the viewpoint, they are...

Take my story... If my story was about how pot dragged me down, and made me lazy so that I couldn't live up to my life's potential - you might think I'm NOT trying to tell people anything... But, if my story was how much fun I had being stoned, and how many cute chicks I got by being in the marijuana culture - you'd say THAT story has a message...

I don't know. What if I was just telling my story? Really, nothing more than me telling a story...

Now, I don't argue that the arts AREN'T influential. They ARE, and they SHOULD be. THAT'S why we HAVE a freedom of expression. I do suggest, however, that if the story teller starts by trying to make a point, instead of just telling a story, I think the story will suck, and I think people will see through it.

I can tell you this because I AM an artist, and I'm writing the story I mentioned. I'm going to tell it like it is. If people SEE, in my story, with their own eyes, that the drug laws are unfair, then that's ON THEM. I DIDN'T tell 'em that. I'm only telling my story. In truth, I'm not smart enough to write a good story AND include my political message.

I, thereby, reassert my proposition. My story is going to REFLECT society. If society takes a lead FROM it, then the arts did their job.

I can tell, of course, that you think the arts job is to manipulate. That's why you want limits put upon the arts.

DO you think the arts should depict society as it SHOULD be? I think you do. Doesn't that sound a little 1984 to you?

excon

[tomder55]

I think you let the cat out of the bag, though. As long as the story depicts a viewpoint that YOU agree with, it ISN'T somebody manipulating the public. But, if you don't like the viewpoint, they are...

I make no such claim . The war films of WWII were clearly meant to portray a positive image of the war effort. They were clearly movies with a message. I wish there were more of them but I would not make a claim that they are only for the pure entertainment value.

Steve already pointed out contemporary movies that have clear Christian messages. To some they may just be well done cartoons and great entertainment but yes even those are meant to influence the audience.

[tomder55]

I can tell, of course, that you think the arts job is to manipulate. That's why you want limits put upon the arts.

Again I have made no such proposition. I am just pointing out what I see as obvious . Yes I make personal judgements on the movies but in no way do I think there should be "limits" ( except perhaps on the age of admission for the obscene and graphic)

[George_1950]

Again I have made no such proposition. I am just pointing out what I see as obvious . Yes I make personal judgements on the movies but in no way do I think there should be "limits" ( except perhaps on the age of admission for the obscene and graphic)

And absolutely zero funding from the taxpayers, for my own part.

[excon]

but yes even those are meant to influence the audience.

Hello again, tom:

Of course, there are those filmmakers who DO start with a viewpoint. Notice that I didn't call them artists.

I still think you've got it backwards. A work needs to be appreciated before it can influence. An artist does his art to BE appreciated - NOT to influence.

I'll bet you're not an artist, huh? Don't you draw? Have you ever drawn? Do you take pictures? Do you scribble or doodle stuff on a legal pad?

Is the stuff you create cool looking?? Are your photographs breathtaking? Even if they're not, what if somebody wanted to buy them?

Did you doodle that stuff, or take those pictures hoping to influence somebody? I don't think you did.

excon

[shatteredsoul]

I think every aspect of the arts, media, and any form of entertainment are to serve different purposes to society and thus have an effect on it in several ways. OF course some people will have a different perspective on what that purpose is, and consequently, what the effect will be as a result. YES, it is supposed to be a means of self expression and to share ideas, information and different types of creative thought.

HOWEVER, what that means to each person, is as vastly different as each individual is in each society. We are given the opportunity to receive so much information and yet it is interpreted in such a wide spectrum of understanding. Some people include their personal and moral beliefs into their perspectives of what they see, hear, read or watch. Some people simply view it as entertainment and put no thought outside of that whatsover. The amazing thing is, how everyone assumes that everyone else sees the same thing as they do. Just like we all have different beliefs, religions, customs, languages and ways of life, the way we interpret things is just as different.

One person sees Brokeback Mountain as the equivalent as a permission slip to endorse homosexuality and its acceptance by society. Another person simply views a love story between two people. The creators of the movie had their own reasons for making it and what story they wanted to tell, what ideas and perspectives they wanted to portray but they cannot assume or expect anyone else to share those views. IT is through art, media and entertainment ,through movies and t.v. that we are innundated with ideas about how we should look, think, act and what we should buy. Some people see it as brainwashing, to others it is just good marketing skills. IT is all in the eye of the beholder and therefore, to argue about your own perception or view being the right one is a futile point. WHAT makes my view any more or less significant than yours?
Moreover, just like with politics and war and issues about pro life and pro choice, no one is going to change their perspective on what they believe based on a movie, book, piece of art, or literature. ONe may become more open to different views but certainly isn't going to change what they consider the moral fiber that they live by.

The only people who are effected beyond a level of fairness are those that are too young and too impressionable by what they see, hear and take part in learning about. YES children are given all sorts of mixed messages by everything they come into contact with, especially in this critical technological age. HOWEVER< it isn't the media or the culture or entertainment or art that are responsible in what the children are seeing, hearing, watching or reading. THAT responsibility lies with the parents and how they interact and explain to their children what their own perception is. EVERYTHING is an opportunity for parents to understand what their children think, believe and are aware of. These outlets for self expression are also means to connect with kids and find out what they really know and how they think about the world.

YOu can look at it as evil and corrupt, or as educational and an opportunity for children to become critical thinkers. Whether it be about politics, body image, religion, abortion or war, I think anytime a dialogue is available for the youth of any society to actively engage in intellectual debates or perspectives, we are on the right track. HoW else do we expect society to be educated but by the means we are given. It doesn't mean we cannot question it, disagree with it or absolutely live by it, it means its essential to grow and learn as people and as a society.
WE won't ever agree on everything but we can have a meeting of the minds, open up dialogue to appreciate and understand different perspectives, ways of life and issues of morality. NOT a hostile atmosphere, but with an open mind to respect each other's views and agree to disagree. Maybe what we need is less criticism and more awareness and acceptance of other people's differences.

That might be a start.
I am not here to be critical or to argue but to simply show that no one is really right or wrong, it is just like a movie, it is open to each person's perception...

[George_1950]

People make and listen to music all day every day to influence others and identify with others.

[tomder55]

Actually you have hit upon one of my lesser hobbies. I draw political cartoons . Guess what I start with...

Now my wife is a great photographer (in my opinion) . She is trying to make a beautiful picture. Other photographers on the other hand have taken pictures for the point they are trying to make. Have you ever seen Matthew Brady's Civil War photos of Antietum (or as George likes to say Sharpsburg) ? Not exactly meant for entertainment I think .

[shatteredsoul]

Music, as with every other form of entertainment is always open for debate, criticism and perspective and it varies with each person. One person would say a song about war would have an effect on how we view war, another person would just say it has a cool beat and loves the guitar section... OPEN TO INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION>
I find it interesting that whenever someone finds something objective to say, no one wants to reply but if its critical or accusatory or incites a personal attack, there are multiple responses, WHY?? And lets see who responds to my last post that addresses the opinions of both sides of this argument. (Maybe because I didn't clarify my personal position on these subjects it isn't as interesting.. I don't see the point in putting people into groups of either liberal or conservative, LOTS OF PEOPLE ARE NEITHER!!

[tomder55]

Individual preceptions are one thing . I think the point of the posting is what the "artist " intended.

Tom Hanks made 'Saving Private Ryan' to honor that generation and to challenge the current generation to earn the sacrifices made by that generation . I know this because he has said so many times and beyond the most shallow viewing of the movie that point is driven home.

That would contest the statement "When I see a movie, I don't see someone trying to influence me. I see them trying to entertain me" The additional contention that it is only us on the right who notice this has also been fairly disputed .

[shatteredsoul]

THe original poster, as well as everyone else cannot know what the artist originally intended, unless their perspective was made explicit by that person . Thus, it is open to interpretation, as with movies or any other form of entertainment or self expression.

Even further, THE effect on society, or attitudes or perception on war will be vastly different for each person who sees Saving Private Ryan, or any other movie. Whether the writer, producer or director had a vision and perception he was trying to share with the masses, really is irrelevant. It may not be received or understood by each person the way he INTENDED. I think the only thing the "right" has proven is that they only view their own moral view as the correct one, and therefore anything that deviates from that is considered immoral, innapropriate or even more, UNAMERICAN.. that is a joke in and of itself.
Even further, the statement about what Tom Hanks said doesn't change the fact that some people wouldn't even consider that notion when watching SAVING PRIVATE RYAN. THAT is just the way it is. Funny thing is, just because that is what he SAID doesn't mean that is how everyone else views or understands it. It will ultimately be their OWN PERCEPTION. Broke back MOuntain could have been made for several reasons, but based on your own personal beliefs about homosexuality, it could make you incapable of viewing it the way that the "WRITER INTENDED" you to see it.

As a matter of fact, INDIVIDUAL PERCEPTION has everything to do with it. For example, the way you view what Excon said and how I view it, is completely different, yet we were given the same information. The same could be said for any other subject. PERIOD.

Also, just as your statements that you have on your signature are again, YOUR PERCEPTION, it does not effect my view or beliefs about OBAMA, even though I am given that information. That is because I am educated and aware of the real issues and of the facts behind the other candidate as well. YOU see a narrow scope and others see a wider one. AGAIN, its in our own beliefs, awareness, education and experience that determine our perspective, NOT the information we are given itself.
THE original poster was trying to make a mockery of what others see as media or other means of self expression, "influencing society" He doesn't agree with it and was clarifying his objections with making a joke of HOLLYWOOD's INFLUENCE on society and whether it's a "left wing Conspiracy". At least that is how I interpreted it and the amazing thing is, that is what makes each one of us different, the ability to think differently. The sad part is, not everyone is respectful of that ability.

[tomder55]

think the only thing the "right" has proven is that they only view their own moral view as the correct one, and therefore anything that deviates from that is considered immoral, innapropriate or even more, UNAMERICAN.. that is a joke in and of itself

Yeah I know I've heard it before ;everything in life including morals are relative.

[shatteredsoul]

Wow are you actually agreeing with me on something?? I just might fall over... lol I think its time to smoke a big fat one EXCON and we can all sing We are the WORLD lmao... Thanks for keeping an open mind on at least one thing TOMDER... really. Yes.. it really is all relative..

[excon]

Hello shattered:

Yup. Take a hit of this... By the way. I think you've been making a lot of sense.

excon

[shatteredsoul]

Thanks For The Love Excon... Ohh And Next Time Try A Flavored Blunt.. Lol Lol Im Glad Im Making Sense To Someone.. .

[bushg]

Here's a greenie:D for shattered soul... loved your post.

I believe a lot of things that are produced are intended to manipulate society... hopefully for the better of mankind.

I do want to say that as someone that was taught to hate people of different races. A fun time for my dads family was to take the kiddies to the end of town and throw rocks and bottles at the black people and trade racial slurs. I'm sure there were physical fights... I probably blocked those out.

I am so happy that there were movies such as Roots to show me that black people had feelings too and had a right to be on this earth. Because for the first 7 years of my life I wasn't taught such. I don't remember any altercations with people of other races but I'm sure if they were around there would have been.
I do remember we were taught that mexicans were lazy, jewish people were money grubbers etc... don't shop with them they will rip you off... get my point.

Now those things were burned in my mind for 7 years and even though my mom did not act like that or participate in it, she was complacent and never stood out against it... probably wasn't allowed to.

She basically believed that everyone belonged with their own group to live in harmony, separately, she believed her bible told her that, because people spoke differently.

So without movies t.v shows who the he!! would have taught me anything about race relations. I certainly would not have given a person of color, even a chance if it had not been for movies and books that I saw on slavery when I was in the 4th grade.

So yeah, Excon I believe when pieces are written and produced even drawn, painted that the artist wants to show their views to the world and sometimes the sole purpose is intended to bring about change. What they think needs to be changed.

I will say that it is up to the viewer how they perceive it, but at least the seed has been planted.

I'm not a great artist but I know when I have written poems that talk about the plights of dogs spending their life and dying on chains... my hope is that whoever reads them will speak out against chaining dogs. They will speak to who they can... because like me how do you know something is wrong if you have never been told or shown.