"Non violence is the core value.." Just a minute, however. Before you're so quick just to keep this generalized category of "non violence" I think you should also have a category titled "Understanding and Knowing Violence". Maybe in a way violence needs to be shown to us or thrown in our faces, and the best way to get this across is by films; intelligent screenwriters who have no limits and a brilliant director who has the reliability and boldness to carry it out, whether it be a factual account or fantasy. TV has limits; forget television because you can't rely on it for this purpose! Brutually violent movies have AS MUCH RIGHT to be here as the fluffiest chick flick. So maybe certain films and filmmakers are simply giving society a wake up call. - JohnPhilip
John, I agree growing awareness is important. But producing (enjoying and earning from) violence-demonstrating films is questionable to me. At least for every violence-loaded film there should be one (or more) neutralising non-violence demonstrating films, where the same conflicts are solved in a friendly and constructive way. And there should be at last one (wiki-) community to discuss it, helping to grow awareness. -- FridemarPache
Does anyone have anything to say about internet adware and spyware? There are many variants of computer malwares and I'm interested in this particular topic. Again, if anyone cares, just answer. - JohnPhilip
John, I agree with you: adware and spyware, is a sort of technical violence, that need a TechnologySolution. As I am mainly present in Wiki-communities, I am nearly never exposed to a+s+m and consequently cannot give advise. By the way, I found the hints of Lion to the YouTube movies (thank you for it) very helpful to get a better understanding of "violence". John, what do you think about ["violence is a message"] -- FridemarPache.
VIOLENCE IS NOT A DETRIMENT TO A FILM OR NOVEL. As I said already, its a product of our society and it happens. In real life, there sometimes aren't happy endings and we're just going to have to deal with that. I guess it comes down to it; I have my opinion and you have yours. "...producing violence demonstrating films is questionable to me". What? Simply because its realism? I'm still not getting your point. Its wrong to critisize a novelist for instance if he depicts true events and people complain its too graphically violent. What is he supposed to do? Alter the true yet brutal facts simply because people refuse to face the reality of those events? Thats nonsense talk in my solid opinion! All right, I'll admit I enjoy watching or reading violence in film or book; but that doesn't mean AT ALL that I'm going to go out and do it. We're not on the same page but which two people really are? And keep in my mind I may be just a lowly middle class citizen (hehe) but my opinion is as valid as yours or anyone else's. - JohnPhilip
A "non violence demonstrating film?" I'll give an example since you haven't. A film I own, Richard Attenborough's production of Gandhi, is an excellent depiction of the life of peacemaker Mohandas K. Gandhi and his attempts to liberate the Indian people from the tyrannical British rule. There is one scene in particular where Ganghi (Ben Kingsley) is beaten for nonconformance. Note he didn't strike the British guard once. He simply burned the passports and solved it without having to use violence IN THAT ONE SITUATION. This brings me to my next point: there's another scene where British soldiers massacre a crowd of Indian citizens. Note the message is non violence yet violence is depicted as well. Violence happens; we try to fight it but is is real. - JohnPhilip
John, again you made a helpful "wake up call", reminding to violence in the Ghandi film, which I already had suppressed in my memory. I like your last sentence: "Violence happens; we try to fight it but is is real." Perhaps we have won you as member, who can better defend against future violence in Meatball, than any other, because you are more sensible to violence than any one else here ... -- FridemarPache