Toronto woman campaigns against 50 Cent biopic

[Lazlo]

Right on.

I would never allow Grand Theft Auto into my house if I had kids, and they would be in deep shit if I found out they were playing it elsewhere, but I would never ever cast a vote banning it. It just boggles my mind to think otherwise.

That game is to much fun. Finally I can run down hookers in my car, massacre the innocent and not have to worry about any sort of retribution.

[Thorgnor]

I remember this kind of debate when Snoop's movie "Murder was the case" came out. Did a lot of good in getting rid of that hooligan, eh?

Ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-ch-cheese unit.

[hamilton]

Who in their right mind debates the utility of a child proof pill bottle lid?

Elderly, arthritic people who can't get them open would debate these caps, for starters.

When I was a kid, my parents locked the medicine cabinet.

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Homer: "See? Thanks to me, now they have a warning!"

[hamilton]

CJ's experience teaching in Toronto schools was that of all the cultures/subcultures that new immigrants would latch onto, hands down the most popular one was the gangsta...

I'm not going to dispute this observation, but I also heard on CBC radio the other morning that 70% of gangsta-rap is purchased by suburban white kids (mostly male, I'm going to assume...).

[SevenSeasJim]

CJ's experience teaching in Toronto schools was that of all the cultures/subcultures that new immigrants would latch onto' date=' hands down the most popular one was the gangsta... [/quote']

I'm not going to dispute this observation, but I also heard on CBC radio the other morning that 70% of gangsta-rap is purchased by suburban white kids (mostly male, I'm going to assume...).

I see this in my high school all the time.

Note: Steel-toed work boots are also back in style again (untied only)

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

Fair enough; I don't think that contravenes any point made ( - full disclosure - it was a white suburban guitar student who had originally lent me that Juice video, btw).

I always wonder, though - when people feel themselves pushed to the wall, what do they turn to? Having spent a bit of time totally disoriented in other countries, I can appreciate a bit of the mire (and that's having a first-world education, and fluency in English, to fall back on).

Is what people are ostensibly concerned about random violence? That might sharpen the point here (or not!).

[Dr. J]

For me the issue has nothng to do with violence. It has everything to do with the allocation of public funds.

To provide taxpayer's money to fund "peaceful solutions/anti-bullying programs" in our schools and then to turn around and use that same money to encourage someone (no matter who) to teach our young people a totally opposite view seems to me to be counter-productive and a poor use of public money.

If I, as a repsonsible parent, raise my children to believe that violence is never a solution to conflict and is not to be condoned, why the hell should I then have to pay fiddy and his well-heeled entourage of hanger-ons to preach the opposite. As tax breaks go, it makes no sense to me.

Maybe, as some say, they'll just go elsewhere & produce it anyways. Maybe so, but at least, I won't feel like I paid them to do it.

Just my $.02 (which, of course, is 48 short of being 50).

[Dr_Evil_Mouse]

I totally agree, re. use of public funds goes, which is something I hadn't addressed. There is then the problem of whether the people that anti-violence (etc.) ads go to give a shit, but that's maybe neither here nor there. I remember that line from Utah Phillips' favourite anarchist - "Ah, judge, what use are your laws? The good people don't need 'em and the bad people don't listen to 'em."

Maybe if the targetted audience of those ads had any sense of the value that went into them.... But then, that's probably what they abstractly imagine themselves embattled against.

[Del]

To provide taxpayer's money to fund "peaceful solutions/anti-bullying programs" in our schools and then to turn around and use that same money to encourage someone (no matter who) to teach our young people a totally opposite view seems to me to be counter-productive and a poor use of public money.

Was 50 Cent "encouraged to teach" anything with this movie? What happened to movies being considered entertainment? If a kid doesn't know the difference between fake violence in a movie and real violence in real life by the age of 14 (assuming this movie is AA) then maybe that kid is a lost cause... My parents instilled a certain level of understanding and respect in me well before I was old enough to explore those avenues without their supervision... If more parents did the same then maybe we wouldn't be having such a ridiculous discussion...

[hamilton]

For me the issue has nothng to do with violence. It has everything to do with the allocation of public funds.

To provide taxpayer's money to fund "peaceful solutions/anti-bullying programs" in our schools and then to turn around and use that same money to encourage someone (no matter who) to teach our young people a totally opposite view seems to me to be counter-productive and a poor use of public money.

But the government isn't using your (or, "our") tax money for this. They are getting a "tax break", not a direct government subsidy.

In other words, the producers of the biopic will have some of the tax money that they already paid out returned to them. And that is tax money that the government would never have received if the film had been filmed somewhere else. And since filming here keeps people employed, it allows the government to collect more income tax than it would have if those people were un- or under-employed.

If the government collects (for example) $400,000 dollars in taxes and fees from the producers - money that it never would have collected had they filmed in New York - and then gives $100,000 back, we're still on the winning end. And no taxpayer money is actually spent.

Plus, from an economic viewpoint, this is pure profit; because the producers are likely American citizens, none of the money that is collected will have to be re-invested into the welfare of those very same people (like health care or welfare), and can then be spent directly on Canadians without having been taken from Canadians. Now, I'm rambling. But you get my point.

[Dr. J]

First off, let me say I totally agree with Mangler. If every parent took the responsibility to raise their children knowing the difference between right and wrong, fact and fiction, then this thread would be ridiculous. Fact is they haven't and aren't about to, so I assume the discussion is only hypothetically ridiculous.

Secondly, let me say that I am absolutely opposed to anything that limits one's freedom of expression. I have no desire to brand 50cent with a warning label, remove him from record stores, ban him from movie theatres or anything else that would draw attention to what he does. It's nothing personal. I feel the same way about Pat Buchanan and a host of others.

My fear based on the opening of this thread ("people should not be forced to fund movies that contribute to violence") was that I had unwittingly contributed to the fostering of a world view very much opposed to my own (particularly in regards to its treatment of women). Hamilton assures me I have not. In fact, he points out that money may actually have been made. Unfortunately, that doesn't make me feel any better because I don't want to profit from it either. I'm sure, however, someone can assure me that the money raised will not reduce the price of gasoline or reach me in any other way, so i can get on with life and just be happy people have jobs.

For the record, there are other things in life that generate revenue and create employment that I'm also opposed to. Most of far greater significance than 50cent. He just happened to be the topic at hand.

And thanks for responding to my post, guys. People don't usually do that.

[secondtube]

50 Cent Saddened by Shooting at Movie

HOMESTEAD, Pa. — 50 Cent said he was saddened by the fatal shooting at a theater where his movie "Get Rich or Die Tryin'" was playing.

"I feel for the victim's family in this situation," 50 Cent said on ABC's "The View" on Friday. "But you know, these weren't kids. This was a 30-year-old man (who) had a dispute with three other guys."

Shelton Flowers, 30, was shot at least three times Wednesday night after he got into an argument with another man inside a Loews multiplex just east of Pittsburgh.

Allegheny County police said Flowers had just watched 50 Cent's movie and got into a confrontation with three men in the bathroom. A fight ensued and spilled out into the concessions area, where Flowers was shot, police said.

No one has been arrested.

It was not known what movie the three men had seen, but John McCauley, the vice president of marketing for Loews Corp., said the company decided to stop showing it at the theater during the investigation.

The violence in the film prompted another theater chain, National Amusements, to end any midnight showings in a Toledo, Ohio, neighborhood where rioting occurred last month after a neo-Hawaiians group visited the city. Businesses were burned and looted, and bricks thrown at police.

Police raised concerns that the film might lead to more unrest.

The theater will continue matinee and evening showings, spokesman Brian Callaghan said Friday.

___

November 11, 2005 - 7:19 p.m. EST

[Thorgnor]

I saw The Terminator when I was in grade 4.

I saw Aliens and Blade Runner when I was in grade 5.

I had seen the entire Monty Python catalogue already by grade 3.

I have yet to commit murder.

The movie scene that most affected me was John Merrick "The Elephant Man" saying "I am not an animal!" in black and white when I was in grade 4.

I cried.

I still tear up during pretty much every emotional scene that I witness.

Compassion is taught in real life, not on TV.

And morality, as it turns out, is largely based on feelings. When people's feelings get hurt they tend to react with moral outrage.

But the key to all this is nothing other that critical thinking, and I do not mean criticism.

Don't get it twisted.

Talk to your children about what they watch and you've got the fix. Don't like what Fiddy says or does? Explain why he's wrong.

Unless, that is, your scared to verbally spar with such a profound genius.

Maybe violent images don't cause violence. Maybe they just attract the attention of people who are already prone to violent behaviour.

Edited November 12, 2005 by Guest

[Dr. J]

"I feel for the victim's family in this situation," 50 Cent said on ABC's "The View" on Friday. "But you know, these weren't kids. This was a 30-year-old man

His attempt to distance himself from what happened based on the age of the participants is revealing...both for what it says and what it implies.

___

[secondtube]

well, violence supports his 'art', so i'm not surprised with his comments.

[MarcO]

"I feel for the victim's family in this situation' date='" 50 Cent said on ABC's "The View" on Friday. "But you know, these weren't kids. This was a 30-year-old man [/quote']

His attempt to distance himself from what happened based on the age of the participants is revealing...both for what it says and what it implies.

I really don't see what he has to distance himself from. He didn't pull the trigger.

I don't care if 50 Cent made a 90 minute movie that was just the words "SHOOT SOMEONE NOW!" flashing in blood red letters for the entire duration of the movie.

People are responsible for themselves and their own actions.

####.

[Lazlo]

People are responsible for themselves and their own actions.

I blame my mother

[bradm]

People are responsible for themselves and their own actions.

I blame my mother

We do, too.

Aloha,

Brad

[hamilton]

well, violence supports his 'art', so i'm not surprised with his comments.

Why the quotation marks around "art"?