Another Unpublished Op-Ed!

Amendment by Amendment

On January 16 President Obama, acting on recommendations made by a task force overseen by Vice President Biden, implemented a number of measures aimed at curbing gun violence in the aftermath of the Newtown shootings.  As the New York Times reported:

Mr. Obama’s plan included 4 major legislative proposals and 23 executive actions that he initiated on his own authority to bolster enforcement of existing laws, improve the nation’s database used for background checks and otherwise make it harder for criminals and people with mental illness to get guns.

Which should lead Americans to ask: who is heading the task force to examine the role of violence in movies on society and when will those recommendations be ready?

While politicians debate the ideal capacity of a gun magazine or the relative merits of a flash suppressor, let’s consider for just a moment what impressionable young adults might be exposed to; a group which likely also includes mentally unstable individuals such as Jared Loughner, age 24; James Holmes, age 24; and Adam Lanza, age 20.

One does not have to look very long or hard to find descriptions likely to unsettle the average parent or community mental health professional.  First up, a movie called “The ABCs of Death” (yes, the title is not encouraging):

A sickened moviegoer is just one reaction the director Jason Eisner (“Hobo With a Shotgun”) witnessed in response to “L Is for Libido,” a segment of “The ABCs of Death” a new anthology of 26 horror shorts, each centered around a different letter of the alphabet and depicting death in grotesque, comic, erotic and head-scratching ways. Among other things, the unsettled patron never got to see Mr. Eisner’s “Y Is for Youngbuck,” about a boy who assumes the spirit of a deer and goes on a revenge spree against a pedophile. (New York Times, January 25, 2013)

Head-scratching yes, but something else also. Revolting, perhaps? Vile, maybe? How about gratuitous or unnecessary?

Next we learn about new films being showcased at the Sundance Film Festival where we are told Hollywood’s finest go to be seen and to look for the next edgy auteur:

Movies about a New Jersey pornography addict, an abused adult film star, a lesbian housewife-turned-prostitute and a British smut kingpin all generated strong offers from distributors at this year's Sundance Film Festival, proving once again—if it needed to be proven—that sex sells. (Wall Street Journal, January 25, 2013)

Question if you will the conflation of sex with violence here, but understand two things. First, our teenagers are watching these films. One shudders to consider what the episodic equivalent of Newtown might be in society when it comes to the effects on our young of the portrayals of sexual depravity in movies. Second, there are more than enough examples that speak to the issue of violence alone.  If one side of the argument seeks limits on the gun manufacturers and their customers, does it not seem fair to at least question the film distributors and their “strong offers” and other enablers of entertainment violence? 

Quentin Tarantino, widely admired in Hollywood, reacted recently with outraged indignation at an interviewer’s question about violence in his new film “Django Unchained” described by the Wall Street Journal as “ferociously violent, ludicrously lurid…”  Which begs the question of how direct a line needs to be drawn between mental illness, movie violence and school massacres? What discussion would we be having if Adam Lanza had a movie stub for “Django Unchained” (or “The ABCs of Death”) in his pocket and perpetrated his horrific deed with a knife or a bomb and not a gun?

So notwithstanding a Second Amendment that speaks to the right to bear arms we have a spirited debate in this country about very specific details of gun ownership. Fine, let’s have that discussion. The country will be better for it. We also have a First Amendment that speaks to the right of free speech. Should we have a discussion about that as well?

Lest anyone think for a moment that the films discussed above are in any way not representative of the product that Hollywood produces, the following description is of Tom Cruise’s latest movie “Jack Reacher” which opened on December 21st:

…“Jack Reacher” brings its hero to Pittsburgh, where a sniper has just shot down five innocent people, including a nanny accompanying a small child, in broad daylight. (New York Times, December 20, 2013)

Another Hollywood stalwart, Sylvester Stallone has a new movie opening on February 1st. 

It is called “Bullet to the Head.” 

The massacre at Newtown occurred December 14th, less than 50 days ago.