Again My Essay - Please help critisize it

Darkwing wrote:Please, go over this, add, take away, manipulate, correct

Marshal McLuhan once said that television touches our lives more intimately, more seductively, and more persuasively than any other media. I believe this to ring true; not just now, but all throughout the brief history of television. Both television and movies impact our lives, the way we choose to run our lives, and how our lives affect others, though we don't realize it. This impact can be quite serious, and is a major factor in our society and culture. Early films usually had a positive and moralistic impression on our lives, whereas modern film has helped to create a society that relishes in violence, adultery and many other inappropriate behaviors.

The content of film over the last fifty years has changed significantly. The fifties saw television programs like “Leave it to Beaver”, “Lassie”, and many other what we would probably consider lame family TV shows. Today we watch shows like “Battlestar Galactica” (the remake), “CSI”, “Criminal Minds” and many other shows of that nature. Now, not to say anything is wrong with those shows, as I myself am a great fan of the original CSI, but something is wrong. CSI, for example, is a show that usually has some very disturbing imagery with the camera zooming in on disgusting body parts, or scenes where Doc Robbins pulls a bullet out of somebody's brain. CSI on its own is relatively harmless, and as long as we don't watch it excessively (or incessantly for some), we should be fine. But something isn't right, and that's the time. CSI airs at 8pm on prime time television; the time when all the kiddies are probably still awake and watching TV. CSI used to air at 10pm, so you had to intentionally want to see the show; to stay up and watch it. Now, you can just flip through the channels with your kids, or worse, the kids are flipping through the channels without their parents, and lo and behold! They are treated to a delicious sight of blood and guts! An important life lesson for kids I'm sure.

The flip-side of arguing about content, and its timing getting worse is that prior to the fifties, women in film were portrayed as inferior beings to men, being their housewives, or working for another man. If a woman ever had a lead role in a film, then she would usually succumb to the intimate and sexual wills of the male character by the time the film was over. So the argument is whether or not we are setting a good example for our kids. Were we raising a sexist society because women didn't usually have much relevance to the film or much independence? Well, I hate to say it, but the sexism has in a way gotten worse in modern film. Today, women are the sex toys of the men. They're not even housewives anymore. At least the housewife set an example of being hard-working and diligent, but today, women wear far too little clothing, and are used for nudity in typical films (not just porno films mind you). Take Harold and Kumar: Escape from Guantanamo Bay. That was a must see comedy, despite its 18A rating. Teens were flocking in to see the film, and for the most part came out thinking it was really funny. I work at a movie theater, and part of my job is to walk in on movies and make sure that they are running smoothly. On several instances, I walked into female nudity, including a scene where Kumar got two women to make out with each other naked. This was the must see comedy? In all of my time at the theater (approximately two years) I have only seen male nudity once, as compared to too many instances of female nudity. Nudity was nearly unheard of in earlier films of the forties and fifties. I imagine there was the odd one here and there, but that odd one was never a must see film.

Charles M. Johnston, a doctor of psychiatry and director for the Creative Development: a think tank and center for leadership training in Seattle, Washington believes that television is a drug that causes us to become addicted to violence in television. He believes that jolts cause our brains to become super active and engaged. A jolt is like an impulse that is sent through our brains, and there are many types of jolts. Jolts can be violence, emotions, comedy, and essentially anything else that causes stimulation while watching television. The more jolts we receive, the more addicted we become. Remember that our brains run on electrical impulses. The more of these impulses it receives, the happier and more addicted it becomes and television has become very good at making us addicted. We crave violence on screen. We crave sexual activity in film. It stimulates us, makes us excited, anxious, and it hipnotizes us. The more we let ourselves succumb to this hipnosis, the more we let it control us, the more of a negative impact it leaves on our society. Instances of violence occured in schools where kids thought they were superheroes and as a result caused injury to themselves or someone else. All around us we see people divorcing, whereas divorce was something scoffed at in the forties. This is a major factor in some of our culture's faults and unnecessary crimes.

Smoking has always been a huge issue, especially recently here in Canada. So if film has such a huge influence on our society, why have smoking rates decreased in recent years, though there is far more smoking in film today then in the fifties? The answer is quite simple; higher smoking regulations. Take here in Nova Scotia, for example. You can't smoke on public property. Across the United States and Canada, smoking has been limited in its advertising venues, so film is pretty much the only place left for smoking to hide. Consequently, we aren't exposed to smoking on such a grand scale, as it's pretty much only in film now.

The debate of film affecting society has been a long one, and many people have valid arguments on both sides of the fence. Film does have an impact on us, even though we try to refuse it. Take that feeling you get when you walk out of a scary movie, or a super dramatic or violent movie, and it takes you several minutes after the film to process it, and even then, you talk about it with your friends, family, and over the internet internet. That is film leaving its mark. That impression is there, and we have to watch out for it. We can't let distributors corrupt our society all for making a few bucks. The problem is that we enjoy it, we are, as Charles M. Johnston, said addicted to it. Why cut off something your addicted to; something that makes you feel good? The producers of films will only make cleaner films if the public wants it. We can't let ourselves be fooled that we're raising our children in a safe society, because even the confines of home aren't safe as long as a television is in the room, and shows like CSI get prime time ratings because it makes money. The fate of quality television and movies rests in the audience. The people who make the producers and distributors money are you, the public.