Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Outside Celestial, the epicentre of trinketry and Dulwich Mumsy-timewasting (in the generic sense).


Bags adorned with a mock-xray design. Look, there's a gun in the bag!


How witty. How ironic. How profoundly stupid.


I suppose we should just be grateful that it's not a knife, or is that coming next week?

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3686-gangster-chic/
Share on other sites

No doubt there are people shallow enough to find a picture of a gun on a handbag amusing. Raises an interesting point, though. Something I really dislike in mainstream cinema is the way it makes violence synonymous with wit. How many movies have you seen where a knife or bullet in the guts gave the hero the final word and got a laugh from the audience as a result? Short step from that and the violence in hiphop culture to the current spate of stabbings.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3686-gangster-chic/#findComment-115056
Share on other sites

In a couple of Indiana Jones films Harrison Ford is confronted by baddies, in one with a scimitar and in the other a bullwhip, and in both he pulls a gun and shoots them. Big laughs all round. Of course, it's the editing that makes it the unanswerable punchline and a message the audience laps up, and Hollywood and all those who invest in it (let's not forget that films are often funded by outside investors - it's a financial product like any other these days) need to face up to the part they're playing in creating this culture.


Same of course applies to all the stupid stereotypes they put out about beauty and age - stupid ugly guys get beautiful girls, girls who aren't stunningly beautiful are ugly, all women want is to get married, women have no value other than their sexual desirability, any woman over 40 is too old to be attractive etc etc. Somebody shoot me! On second thoughts, I'm off to watch Prince Caspian over a camomile tea at the Ritzy.


*stumps off muttering* Gun on a handbag indeed...

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3686-gangster-chic/#findComment-115097
Share on other sites

I don't think it's solely responsible but I do believe it makes a big contribution to the problem. People consume a huge amount of violence via films, TV, games, music etc these days, and the more you're exposed to it, the less sensitised you become. Extended, lingering, close-up violence is now mainstream stuff, and you only have to think about some recent films you've seen to realise how much they've had to up the dose to deliver the same hit. And it's not portrayed realistically enough for kids to understand the consequences: apparently kids who've been shot in gang fights often say they didn't know it would hurt - because in video games and films people just fall down.


Would also argue that audiences tend to identify with the source of power - you may be familiar with the feminist theory that women watching westerns 'surprisingly' identified with the cowboys rather than the token and usually powerless female characters - so in this case they're absorbing an understanding that violence means you're powerful/brave/funny/sexy.


Sorry if I appear to be ranting. Even Prince Caspian - apparently suitable for all ages - contained levels of violence I'm sure I'd have been frightened by when I was small.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/3686-gangster-chic/#findComment-115122
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • CPR Dave, attendance records are available on Southwark's website. Maggie Browning has attended 100% of meetings. Jon Hartley has attended 65%.
    • I do hope NOT, wouldn't trust Farage as far as I could throw him, Starmer & co.  He's backed by GB News which focus's predominantly on immigration while the BBC focus predominantly on the Israel - Gazza conflict.   
    • Everyone gets the point that Corbynites try to make with the "total number of votes cast" statistic, it's just a specious one.  In 2017, Corbyn's Labour got fewer votes than May's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes). In 2019, Corbyn's Labour fewer votes than Johnson's Tories (both the percentage of votes and aggregate number of votes); and he managed to drop 2.7 million votes or 6.9% of vote share between the two elections. I repeat, he got trounced by Boris F***ing Johnson and the Tories after the Brexit omnishambles. It is not true that a "fairer" electoral system would have seen Labour beat the Tories: Labour simply got fewer votes than the Tories. Corbyn lost twice. There is no metric by which he won the general election. His failure to win was a disaster for the UK, and let Johnson and Truss and Sunak into office. Corbynites have to let go of this delusion that Corbyn but really won somehow if you squint in a certain way. It is completely irrelevant that Labour under Corbyn got more votes than Labour under Starmer. It is like saying Hull City was more successful in its 2014 FA Cup Final than Chelsea was in its 2018 FA Cup Final, because Hull scored 2 goals when Chelsea only scored 1. But guess what - Chelsea won its game and Hull City lost. Corbyn's fans turned out to vote for him - but an even larger group of people who found him repellant were motivated enough to show up and vote Tory.
    • I guess its the thing these days to demonstrate an attitude, in this instance seemingly of the negative kind, instead of taking pride in your work and have standards then 🤷‍♀️
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...