The web was abuzz with chatter about Jim Carrey, who stars in Kick-Ass2, coming out in non-support of the film which, by the comic book author’s own admission has, “a high body count.” Said Carrey:
“I did Kickass a month b4 Sandy Hook and now in all good conscience I cannot support that level of violence. I meant to say my apologies to others involve[d] with the film. I am not ashamed of it but recent events have caused a change in my heart.”
At the same time, the New York Times Michael Cieply quietly posted a story with this headline, “Hollywood’s Passion for Guns Remains Undimmed.”
On the one hand, if you’re Jim Carrey, you don’t have to answer to anyone but yourself. He’s made enough fuck-you money that no one in the press or Hollywood can tell him what to do or what to say. On the other hand, if you weren’t somehow changed by the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School you might need to do some soul-searching to figure out why. The liberals blame guns. The gun owners blame drugs and unchecked mental illness. Some think the first person shooter games are breeding a generation of well trained, isolated violence junkies whose high can only be satisfied, ultimately, by a real world body count. Only a few are willing to blame Hollywood. Perhaps it isn’t any one thing. Perhaps the combination of easy access to weapons, unchecked mental illness, celebrity culture and our continuing lust with cinematic gun violence has brought us to the point where a young man can take a semi-automatic weapon into an elementary school and mass murder tiny children.
After Sandy Hook nothing changed. No major laws were passed. The cowards in Washington were cowed by the NRA into inaction. No one wants to live in a country where decisions are made for you: no more violent games. No more violent movies. No more sexy billboard with guns next to powerful movie stars. No more movies with high body counts. We all still want to be “free.” That ultimately leaves it up to the individual. If one movie star refused to smoke cigarettes in a movie in the 90s because they knew cigarettes caused cancer that might mean other movie stars would refuse and before you knew it, movies didn’t feature sexy movie stars smoking cigarettes, without anyone having to order them to do so. It was public perception that changed.
So now Jim Carrey has drawn a line. He still did the movie, Kick-Ass2, but he’s come out publicly against it. One movie isn’t going to change anyone’s mind. But maybe it signals in a change in the way people think, whether they can still get off on violence the way they used to. I guess we’ll find out in the next ten years.
fake ray bans for sale the cart and concession girls are also outstanding
Discount Ray Bans
On the other hand, if you weren’t somehow changed by the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School you might need to do some soul-searching to figure out why.
I actually don’t understand anyone who didn’t understand that that could happen on December 13, 2012. We live in a world where kids are killed everyday by family members, strangers, pedophiles whatever the method. We’ve had numerous mass shootings over the years. So people who didn’t know about that possibility or changed their opinions on that day are idiots, imo. If you have a stance on any issue, I’d assume that you thought it through at least a little bit and not just voted or supported causes on a whim. I think everyone here had very clear views on this issue before that terrible event. If anyone changed their mind, I’d have to think they hadn’t thought about it in the first place.
What Jim Carrey is doing is because of his video rant/comedy skit against everyone who disagreed with him. Once he did that, everyone jumped on the fact that he had just made a violent film. I’m willing to bet he hadn’t thought about his own participation in violent content before he made the video. He just reacted to the shooting and took his own target, poor old dead Charlton Heston, not realizing it could come back around to him. Now because it’s time for the film to come out I think he couldn’t possibly handle the questions he’d get on the publicity tour and this is his way of chickening out. He picked a fight he couldn’t finish. If he believes that violence in this film or any other violent films can influence people then he should have to answer for every single one of them that he’s participated in. He’s taking the easy road and making it look like the high road.
I’m reading a lot of comparisons between Columbine and Sandy Hook here and I have to say both couldn’t be more different. Hear me out before the hate spews out of your fingertips. It’s sort of expected that crime can erupt in a high school environment. Hormones raging. Peer pressure off the charts. Feeling alone and isolated. I get it and what happened to those teenage victims was horrible and should have never happened. But Sandy Hook on the other hand we are talking about 6 year olds whose tiny bodies were shredded with high powered ammo. Each small child receiving 11 rounds each. 20 kids. 11 rounds maiming their tiny frames beyond recognition. There are no words. This incident to me literally defied categorization. Something within us as a society is clearly broken and we need to address it. A lot of variables are at play but to deny the influence pop culture has on our lives is not only detrimental to the path of self awareness but just willfully oblivious.
When it gets to the point where your natural abhorrance to violence against children of any age has to be has dissected by an aficionado for the sake of making a moral argument, you’re in a situation where you can’t see the forest for the trees.
Is it the age thing that makes one worse than the other, more worthy of condemnation? ‘Cause if the answer is yes, baby, you’ve already lost the war.
That’s what makes Carrey look like a fool to many of us.
I have to tip my hat to Jim Carrey. Much respect.
Look whether those who fall on the side of calling him out to be a hypocrite I ask these two simple questions: have you ever experienced tragedy and if so how were you affected by it?
Honestly, I dont think that Jim Carrey comes out of this looking all that good.
There has been multiple horrific school shootings in the past, if it was a matter of principle…dont accept the part.
There was a previous Kick Ass film and there was the script for this one, the content can come as no surprise to anyone…so dont accept the part.
Lastly, if he truly believe that violent behaviour within films (especially considering that this one is a COMIC BOOK film) has an actual impact upon violent behaviour in society (of which there is no real proof), then he ought to denounce much of his back catalogue too. In fact, might as well just tear up his whole career.
The Pope,
don’t worry about it. I don’t feel singled out.
It wasn’t really that Columbine changed _my mind_. Actually, perhaps the word “change” was wrong to be used in that particular sentence. However, Columbine was (as I said) the first mass-shooting in a school that I remember hearing about and that I can well remember following from the news. I had just started to pay attention to what’s going on in the world (yeah, I was relatively young at the time… not so much in 2013, haha). I guess Columbine’s never left my mind, really, so I suppose it did change me somehow, someway.
That being said, I’ve never been pro-gun. I’ve always, as long as I remember, been against guns. I didn’t even play with toy guns when I was a kid. My choice, not something my parents forbid from me. So my opinion about guns remains unchanged. My mind hasn’t been changed. Guns are lethal. They are dangerous in many ways (including psychologically, mentally) and no good for society as a whole. I mean the attitude guns create. And for clarification: no, I don’t blame entertainment industry for (gun) violence. Not one bit.
But my point was that what happened at Sandy Hook has been happening many times before and unfortunately it will happen again. Columbine was 1999. That’s 14 years ago. It shouldn’t come as a surprise. It shouldn’t be life-changing for adults like Jim Carrey who know about the other tragedies. Their lives should have been changed long time ago. If Carrey feels like he can’t promote the level of violence in his movie, he should have felt that way before than Sandy Hook. Sandy Hook is just one tragic episode on a way too long list of tragedies. Events at Sandy Hook were nothing new under the Sun, as cold as that sounds.
But like you said and like I said earlier… “Better late than never, I guess”.
If only there was some sort of ratings system in place that says “hey this movie is violent – warning” that way if i don’t wanna watch a violent movie then i don’t have too.
J.A.H.,
I don’t know why Carrey changed his mind after Sandy Hook. I have no wish to single you out so I only ask this very gently. What was it about Columbine in particular that caused you to change your mind? I think it’s because we all have a tipping point. My one was way back in 1996 when a gunman went into a school in Dunblane, Scotland and massacred 16 children and one adult before turning his gun on himself (one of the children who survived was a young boy named Andy Murray who has since become the tennis star). I don’t live in America so it was the first time I learned anything like that could happen. But does it matter why it took me or Carrey or you so long? So long as we see the light and make the journey.
I kinda applaud him for taking a stand but on the other hand I’ve got to ask: why did he change his mind only after Sandy Hook? I don’t think I need to list all the other tragedies that have happened in the US (and in other parts of the world) in recent years.
In regards to what Sasha said and what’s on Jim Carrey’s mind… I didn’t change after the events at Sandy Hook but I don’t need to do any soul-searching because I’ve been changed since Columbine, which is the first mass-shooting that I can remember witnessing via news. So my stance on this issue has been firm and unchanged for quite a while now. Why did it take so long for Jim Carrey?
But better late than never, I guess.
A question comes to my mind: “Kick Ass 2” opens in September, right? Is still being edited? Anybody out here thinks that maybe the status quo of Carrey in the picture (his screen time, his part on the development of the plot) could be changed as a backlash? That the studio could reduce his part oh the picture?
Steve50
How about Carrey had an epiphany? He’s entitled to it. In a democracy people are allowed to change their minds. It’s not flip-flopping. It’s called seeing something from another perspective. Just like Robert Downey Jr., going Republican.
Hollywood is not the cause of gun violence but the cosy relationship it has with the gun industry is uncomfortable. You can’t blame it all on one particular thing but, gun violence comes from the gun. Society creates, allows for, condones and accommodates the gun industry. And until such time as a Senator/Congressional Representative/CEO of one of those gun manufacturers loses his/her own child because someone blows that child’s head clean off… ain’t nothin’ serious gonna change. Why? Because another brutal reality holds an all too powerful hold over people’s lives. Money. But you know what… all the money in the world isn’t going to bring back all those dead children. Only rich, arrogant fuck-heads believe they buy themselves clear of tragedy. And those same rich, arrogant fuck-heads are either paying off the law-makers… or they are the law-makers.
I agree 100% with everything you said about gun violence and the responsibilities you describe – well said – but Carrey’s epiphany smacks of the likes of “clean coal” to me.
RDJ went GOP? gawd.
So you do a job that makes you a fuckwad of money, then denounce it on the grounds that it is ethically wrong because of a recent tragedy?
Well, that one incident is just the most recent in a very long list of similar incidents, for which a certain faction “out there” would like to place sole blame on the entertainment industry, rather than take collective responsibility.
If taken at his word, that means Mr C:
1 – saw no importance of the previous tragedies, blindly took the job and now has been reborn, hallelujah
or
2 – suddenly wants to believe that the hand that feeds him is the responsible party
or
3 – is a confused and desperate guy who thinks he can the right thing and grab some positive publicity for his sagging career by throwing his project – and the other people connnected with it – under the bus.
Just stick to the script, JC.
To the “put your money where your mouth is” crowd…
How do you know he hasn’t? In that note, he’s probably losing money by saying this anyway… As the biggest name in the cast, his contract almost certainly had a clause requiring him to do publicity to support it. Would you rather he do what most other actors would, wait until months after the film and publicity is over before denouncing it?
This is obviously something he cares about. Can’t people just listen to what he has to say? Must people always second-guess people like him and question his sincerity?
Good evening,
I have watched thousands and thousands of films in my 43 years on the planet. My favourite film is Silence of the Lambs, which I studied for my degree and have watched at least thirty times.
I have not kidnapped anyone, kept them captive, killed them, skinned them or eaten them, nor have I shot,stabbed or worn someone elses skin as my own.
Mr. Carrey’s ‘argument’ is nothing more than a wisp of smoke in the wind. Books, songs, films, tv do not cause the huge issues that you have in America – it is your ridiculous insistence on clinging to your guns that causes these problems.
Take movies out of the equation because they do not belong there.
Good evening.
I’m assuming you are speaking of a psychology degree? I minored in psychology as well, and I’m 43, having watched a ton of movies in my time, but to come out and say that movies (media) have no influence on the lives of people who are becoming more addicted to a variety of things is just utterly nonsensical. The media has a huge impact on those who watch it. You just happened to be somewhat more adjusted to seeing the difference between reality and fantasy. There are a ton of people who can’t see those lines anymore. And so, ipso facto, the media can and is to be blamed somewhat.
I do wonder where you got your degree now. Nonsense.
I’m not buying it. There’ so much blame placed on Hollywood by politicians (usually republican politicians whom believe anyone is allowed a gun anywhere in the US at any time).
We have had violence on television and film since the beginning of film. We have not had such relaxed and ridiculous gun legislation however. That’s the problem.
Carrey should be speaking out about that – and not about the people who have buttered his bread.
Exactly. If he’s SO against, then he surely isn’t going to keep the money, is he? Maybe he should donate it to the cause.
I find this reeks of self aggrandizement – fine, you regret making the movie after the events of Sandy Hook. Who wouldn’t be?
I think that if you want this to seem like a genuine appeal to stop violence in film, you should return the money you were paid to appear in it or donate the equivalent to an anti gun/violence cause.
Put your money where your mouth is.
It sounds more or less like a [PR] damage control to me.
—
I’m not American. I’m pro-American. But when it comes to gun-related violence crimes in US, especially random massacre of sort, it seems this problem has been prolonged save solution. The way I see it re US situations: perhaps gun control measures should be introduced and strictly implemented #to begin with, but then conflicts of interest will take place by all means; politicians, gun sellers, people pulling an angle re “freedom”, et al, will start showing up protecting their own interest regardless of the real issue. . . .
This shit is already way under way, and getting precisely nowhere!
Exactly.
Only a few are willing to blame Hollywood.
Too many are willing to blame Hollywood. It’s common chatter to claim that films are to blame for violence such as that which took place at Sandy Hook last December, and the media perpetuates the notion because it’s popular. People don’t want to search for a deeper meaning for societal violence, into human nature, nor do many want to admit that organisations with such influence as the NRA could be accountable. It’s much easier for them to blame Hollywood. That way, no-one has to risk feeling guilty.
I don’t think this is going to help. The violence in the first Kick-Ass was plainly comedic, and films like that surely have very little impact on the minds of those volatile types who commit such awful crimes as the mass shootings which are so terrifyingly prevalent in the US.
You said it better than I could. Thanks.
TBH, violence has been going on long before, video games, movies and music with lyrics existed. However, we have to be foolish not to think that these things don’t have some sort of influence on people, positive and negative. If Carrey feels strongly about this then I would hope he would do more.
I feel really conflicted about this issue (movies being responsible for gun violence), and so I find myself feeling conflicted about Carrey’s stance as well.
On the one hand, it is a brave and unexpected move from a major star to “undermine” a major product like Kick Ass 2, on the other hand I think Carrey should have known about and made his mind up about this issue before taking part in a project which is a multi-million dollar deal and whose creators, producers and distributors rely on his cooperation and willingness to sell the product at hand.
It is – however sympathetic a gesture on Carrey’s behalf – a mildly hypocritical move. What’s next? Because Carrey should continue to speak up and pursue changes in the society at large as well as within the industry: He could start by declining to take part in films that favor a blatant use of product placement (but I’m sure he won’t go there…)
I wish Carrey would have simply said that after the events of Sandy Hook that he cannot in good conscience participate in any future films with such unrestrained violence. Or he could have used the press junkets for the film to encourage people to re-examine violence.
But I guess it’s good he came out about this well in advance of the film’s premiere instead of the day before.