It’s amazing how much ire just two tweets can cause. Jim Carrey yesterday created a “controversy” by posting on Twitter that after the events of the Sandy Hook massacre, he could no longer help promote the upcoming film he stars in, “Kick-Ass 2.”
Carrey, who has recently been a vocal gun control advocate, effectively caused a political fervor over his public comments. Some fans, critics and anti-gun supporters have come to his side in taking this bold stance against a potential summer blockbuster and a hot topic, but most have called out his supposed hypocrisy, claiming that the timing of Sandy Hook and the impending release of “Kick-Ass 2” seem off, and that Carrey has appeared in numerous films in which he has wielded guns but has never expressed disdain over this or similarly over other massacres in recent memory.
I did Kickass a month b4 Sandy Hook and now in all good conscience I cannot support that level of violence. My apologies to e
— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) June 23, 2013
I meant to say my apologies to others involve with the film. I am not ashamed of it but recent events have caused a change in my heart.
— Jim Carrey (@JimCarrey) June 23, 2013
This is a faulty argument, firstly because it’s unfair to criticize Carrey for trying to change his opinion and have a “change of heart,” secondly because several of the aforementioned films in which he holds guns are from the ‘90s and are referenced without context. What’s more, if you can find me a modern, major male actor who has not held at least one gun in a film, then you win bragging rights for the day.
Although Carrey’s comments have turned into a political pissing match in which conflicting statements and ad-hominem attacks about Carrey’s choices as a comedian are being thrown around willfully, this debate does raise interesting questions about the state of violence in the movies.
Carrey has put critics and movie supporters in a difficult place; defense of his statement arguably implies by association that “Kick-Ass 2” is too violent, and that he has all the reason to abstain based on his political beliefs. And although I can’t speak for all critics, the general opinion is that works of art, movies or otherwise, do not cause real world violence. That would be ridiculous. But Carrey’s minimal comment (which really shouldn’t be overanalyzed) sways closer to Fox News’ assertion (despite what Fox has said about Carrey in this aftermath) that it is popular culture, not guns, that cause violence.
What cannot be argued is that there is a lot of violence in mainstream Hollywood films, regardless of the context in which they are presented. How much is too much, what crosses the line, and what massacre has to make major studios rethink the images that are fit for frivolous, summer release? Continue reading “Don't take aim at Jim Carrey”