Terrorism in movies puts profit before sense

Brenneman is a student at Loyola Marymount University.

By Anthony Brenneman

After the terrorist strike in New York, everyone took some time
to reflect. As reported in the Los Angeles Times on Sept. 13, this
contemplation caused the indefinite postponement of Warner Bros.
Pictures’ terrorism-themed action thriller “Collateral
Damage.” The possible social impact of the film was deemed
inappropriate.

This rare instance during which Hollywood admits the possibly
harmful implications of its films raises some questions. Will
certain material that is now considered inappropriate continue to
be produced, or is this a temporary instance of social
responsibility? What types of violence or questionable material
should we re-think showing and viewing? Do we continue to use media
to recklessly present a skewed view of reality and, if so, does
such irresponsibility need to be challenged and changed?

Terrorism is defined as some form of violent attack that
instills a fear so shocking that it deters us from living our
previously free and normal lives. All of us have seen films that
have frightened us in some way, causing us to change our behavior
““ walking to our cars at night, shuddering at the possibility
of an unknown intruder in the dark. Film has the indelible power to
influence our minds and behavior. There is a kind of terrorism film
can create.

The upcoming film “Joy Ride,” for example,
unwittingly creates the same fear. The previews tell the tale of
two attractive young men traveling across the country to pick up a
female friend. Along the way they unintentionally invite a
psychotic killer into their lives by pretending to be flirtatious
females on a CB radio. They agree to meet him at a hotel, but tell
him they are staying in the room next to theirs.

Unfortunately, the people in that room are murdered, thrusting
the boys into a horrific game of psychological torture and
impending death, tormented by a madman trucker, who somehow also
manages to kidnap their girlfriend.

After watching a film such as this one, will we ever take a road
trip without subconsciously feeling a bit fearful of someone
lurking out there waiting to harm us? When we attempt to escape
reality, films like these assault us with a kind of terror that
follows long after the last shot fades out.

Some will argue that a movie is “just a movie” or
“mere fantasy.” If this were so, why would such images
follow us in our daily lives long after we view the films? Some
people argue that films merely reflect the fact that murderers
exist and a lack of exposure would deny this truth.

However, the many glamorized portrayals of perversely violent
people do not portray the reality of psychotic killers and the
scope with which they affect our lives. Do we want to pay homage to
and assist those “evil” people in terrorizing us by
frequently placing them and their exploits on large screens all
over our world, for adults and our youth to
“enjoy”?

Our television shows and news programs can be equally harmful.
They vividly report violent and murderous acts and then just move
on to other news without any supporting information. The goal is to
sell airtime.

Do we need to be repeatedly unrealistically frightened only to
increase the networks’ ratings and profits? Does anyone other
than the networks benefit from this?

We are constantly faced with violence in the media, yet blame
only the profit motive as the culprit. But what really counts
““ the bottom line or caring for everyone’s
well-being?

In the wake of the tragedy, it has been revealed to be the
latter.

Does profit force us to act irresponsibly or do we coerce
ourselves to act that way because of our desire for profit? We must
reevaluate our values and then use them to direct our actions.

In one of his many speeches, President George W. Bush referred
to the dropping of differences, political squabbling and corporate
competitiveness to help those in New York as representing the
“best of America.”

Why must the best be done only now? Why can’t we change
the system and always act for the “best?”

Some people argue that films do not affect our society. However,
those who made “Collateral Damage,” for example, spent
six years in development and used tons of creative effort and
millions of dollars in resources on their film. Yet, regardless of
the dollars spent and the possible profit to be made, producers and
distributors realized the unhealthy aspects of their creation and
acted responsibly: they pulled the film.

Advertising is a multibillion-dollar industry that uses all
media to influence people, and we accept this.

Where product placement in films influences buying habits in
everyday life, violence placement does likewise and just as
effectively and harmfully.

One would think that with such a personal and financial
investment, in the time artists spend making films and the dollars
investors spend on production, they would market more than just
gratuitous violence to humankind.

It is hoped that creative individuals will communicate something
more meaningful and the public will want to see something more
meaningful as well.

Responsibility for the kinds of films and television programs
that we produce must exist in the immediate aftermath of the
attacks. However, after public memory fades or slanted coverage
reshapes our outlook on the world by instilling anger, hatred, or a
desire for material items and then desensitizing us to violence,
will we attempt to go back to our old ways?

We as a global community must now hold ourselves more
accountable for our actions. The questions for us who accept that
responsibility are: How long will that caring last when profit
speaks louder than wisdom? Will we see each other as human beings
deserving of love and respect, not to be used as a means to profit?
Will we allow the cycle to continue?

Fact is stranger than fiction, and the importance of where we
stand as a human race is greater than any fantasy that can be
dreamed up in a Hollywood studio.

Let us start striving to reflect reality, the one that matters,
but which we so often try to escape or do not allow others or
ourselves to know exists.

We must all have the courage and conviction to use our work and
media in a way that will be unique in history. It will be a
demanding process, but we must start that process.

Films or television programs that depict excessive and
glamorized violence, misogynist musical lyrics and videos, computer
games that offer violence as play, any media that takes the value
of a life and treats it lightly, must not be tolerated in a world
that rejects terrorism.

As individuals, we must all take the lead.