I believe that I may have said something to that effect.
It's an old story, and it's not going to go away any time soon. The difference between cartoon violence and graphic violence is not a matter of degree. It's a matter of personal preference. I truly believe that that is the entire impetus for the anti-game movement. They're trying to legislate taste.
Awwwwwww, that is the cutest little kitty . . . ZOMG it bites! The venom is going into my brain! AUUUGH!
I would think that the cartoon violence in the Elmer Fudd type cartoons is worse that games, being far more fake and not showing any negative recourse. In today's Uber-Violent games, you can argue that all of them show the violence as having consequences.
that's why I never understood all the bs around GTA, you'd think politicians would like the fact that, no matter how depraved and skilled you are, the "man" will eventually slap you down, even if they have to bring in tanks to do it.
I feel that cartoon violence in classic Warner Bros. cartoons is redeemed by the exposure it gives to classical music. :) Bugs directed the Barber of Seville, and even did a truncated version of Wagner's Ring Cycle (in "What's Opera, Doc?"). Cartoon violence, on the whole, is explosive-oriented slapstick. Granted, it shows no consequences, but I would hope most children would understand that having a ton of rocks dropped on your head would kill you.
The concept of 'toon physics/biology has been addressed in subsequent productions ("Who Framed Roger Rabbit", "Bonkers", etc.) where toons are shown to be practically invulnerable to harm that would kill a human instantly. I've always felt that it was an interesting way of dealing with it.
(The comment has been removed)
It's an old story, and it's not going to go away any time soon. The difference between cartoon violence and graphic violence is not a matter of degree. It's a matter of personal preference. I truly believe that that is the entire impetus for the anti-game movement. They're trying to legislate taste.
meep, meep, indeed...
Reply
I would think that the cartoon violence in the Elmer Fudd type cartoons is worse that games, being far more fake and not showing any negative recourse. In today's Uber-Violent games, you can argue that all of them show the violence as having consequences.
Reply
Reply
Reply
The concept of 'toon physics/biology has been addressed in subsequent productions ("Who Framed Roger Rabbit", "Bonkers", etc.) where toons are shown to be practically invulnerable to harm that would kill a human instantly. I've always felt that it was an interesting way of dealing with it.
Reply
Leave a comment