Grand Theft Culture: The Entertainment Industry Goes for the Jugular

Grand Theft Auto IV just came out this past week.
This review by Cullinan Hoffman would give any of us reasons to not get it for our kids. I know I wouldn't get it for my nephews.

The debut of "Grand Theft Auto IV", a highly-realistic video game in which players "win" by committing violent criminal acts, is notable for several reasons, but most importantly because of what it says about a society that is engaged in an orgy of self-destruction, and cannot even recognize what is happening.

The Grand Theft Auto series makes the player into a criminal who wins points by stealing cars, assassinating rivals, killing police, running over pedestrians, and even murdering a prostitute with a baseball bat rather than paying her. It is, in short, a game that glorifies brutal criminality and enables players to fantasize their participation in mind-numbing barbarism.

The fact alone that Grand Theft Auto IV is expected to earn more than $400 million during its run, rivaling the most popular movie releases, speaks volumes about what has happened to the U.S. during the last fifty years. What would once have seemed like a blatant and massive assault on our society by a commercial interest, is now a blockbuster form of entertainment.

Mainstream publications such as Business Week yawn at the moral objections raised against such software, and instead rave about the realistic graphics, referring to the game as "Grand Theft Awesome". "We have a hard time imagining anyone picking up this game and not feeling like this is one of the best $60 purchases they've made in a long time," says the reviewer, seemingly unconcerned that he is talking about a murder simulator.

The new version of the game and the mentality it promotes have already claimed their first victim. A man standing in line waiting to purchase the game on the first night of sales in south London stabbed a passer-by. "It was a scene straight from the game itself," said one witness.

"Grand Theft Auto", as monstrous as it is, is only a single example of the Culture of Death that is overwhelming what is left of Anglo-American civilization.

cross-posted on A Catholic View

Full Review here

Movie Review: Cidade de Deus (City of God) (2002)

SHORT REVIEW: Depressing, haunting, extremely hard to watch – loved it.

The box cover for this DVD boldly displays Roger Ebert’s announcement "One of the best films you’ll ever see!" Normally, I find Ebert’s taste in film to be lacking. He’s a bright enough guy but his political and social agenda are too obtuse for my political and social agenda to withstand. While his exclamation is a tad overdone, this is a very potent film on many levels. The acting alone is worth the price of admission. The actors are so strong, I often felt as if I were watching a documentary, not a film.

However, I do strongly advise you to see this movie. It is a harsh film about the trails of a young man named Rocket growing up in the toilet that is City of God (found about fifteen miles outside of Rio de Janeiro.) City of God is ironically named since if there were hell on Earth, it would be a place like this. We are shown this brutal world and its hellish soap opera in all of its lurid details. This film goes on for over two hours and I couldn’t keep my eyes from it. The richness of the story and the honesty in which the events are presented is brilliant. The structure of the film is masked by clever narrative tricks such as briefly introducing a character, only to tell us he will be more important later. This sets a character up when it is most convenient to the story. We then wait for the character’s reintroduction so we can find out about who they are. The narrator does this a few times and it works wonderfully. It gives exposition without being intrusive in addition to infusing the narration with a human flavor (he seems to get ahead of himself while telling the story and has to backtrack.)

The content of this film is hard to watch. I strongly warn you about this. Children are shot and killed. Women are raped. Men are gunned down. This is not for the faint of heart. It is a film for those who need a dose of realism. If nothing else, this film will make you feel gratitude for your station in life, if you do not live in a situation even close to the one presented in this film.


Cautions: As I mentioned, there's rape, beatings, shootings - a variety of violent acts. This is liberally mixed with sexual content and harsh language. This is a film for adults - discerning adults. None of the rough content is gratuitous however. This is an important distinction to make. It is a natural development of the plot and the environment. Violence is a part of the story because violence is a part of the lives of the characters - you can't have one without the other.


Worldview: The film doesn't take a strong theological stand but it did raise some issues, at least for me, when I viewed it.

Most Christian thinking (at least in the West) I describe as "suburban Christianity". This means ideas and concerns are developed from the point of view of a bunch of puffy suburbanites sitting comfortably and safely in their homes. Only the most affluent Christians would sit around and seriously discuss whether it is healthy to watch PG-13 Rated movies or not - we are so blessed to have such stupid concerns. While I have nothing against the Western middle class, it seems to me that much of our theology has been weakened by our casual lifestyles. Films such as this can wake us up from their comfy naps and remind us that the power of the Word is there for people in far dire circumstances, who seem to have nothing to save them. Hope - God - still lives in the darkest of places, no matter how deep the well we fall, his grace is still there.

Eastern Promises (2007)

Short Review: There is exactly one too many naked men in this film – that is to say there’s a naked man in this film.


This is a brutal film and not for the queasy. The film opens with a gory throat slashing and then moves directly to a pregnant woman hemorrhaging at a convenience store. If this seems like a harsh way to open a film you can stop reading now, this isn’t the film for you.

The film showcases a family of Russian mobsters operating in London. Anna, a midwife (Naomi “how can someone so pretty be so boring” Watts) looks over a baby after the baby’s anonymous mother dies. Having only the mother’s diary (which is written in Russian) for identification, Anna decides to have a local Russian immigrant restaurateur translate the book. Unbeknownst to Anna, the restaurateur (Armin Mueller Stahl) is the head of a crime family and the dead girl is one of his sex slaves. Anna is quickly pulled into the web of the mobsters which includes the stoic Nikolai (Viggo Mortensen). If you don't think this sounds like a compelling narrative, you’d be right. The story is rather flat, but the lack of a fantastic arc to the story lends more credibility to the piece in a certain way. This is a mob movie with all of the contrivances removed. Since it is devoid of stylized assassinations and gangland battles, we are left with a stark character piece that is all too willing to show the bad side of those involved.

Mortensen (Hidalgo) is the real treasure in the film and he commands over the other performances. His Nikolai is an intensely interesting yet utterly despicable character. This performance is a clear candidate for a best actor nod and deservedly so. The man is willing to make risky moves in his career. Following the Lord of the Rings Trilogy it is certain he could have written his own ticket and gone the usual Hollywood route. Mortensen has chosen a different path and followed with more complicated roles that reveal an actor more interested in making intelligent works than popcorn fluff.

This film reteams director David Cronenberg (Scanners, The Fly) and Mortensen. Much like their previous effort, A History of Violence, this film studies violent characters and the morally confused universes they inhabit. This piece is filled with harsh scenes of cruel people doing cruel things to one another. Many feel that violence in film is inherently a bad thing. In particular people despise the acts like the ones found in this movie which seem to fail to provide a clear moral denunciation of the violence. I disagree with this view provided there is context and meaning to the violence. The violence in the film is not stylized nor is it cinema friendly. There’s a sense of dreadful inevitability to every horrifying act. The criminals are predators and they do what predators are inclined to do – hunt, destroy and consume. When a man is murdered by an opposing mob family or when a woman is introduced into sexual slavery, it is treated as a natural act no different than the killing of a weak elk by a lion. Those who live by the sword die by the sword so those involved should be shocked when their time comes. Cronenberg orchestrates the adult content to full effect. An example of this is the movie’s most striking scene where Mortensen’s character Nikolai is attacked in a steam bath. Nikolai and his two assassins slash at each other with knives, wrestle and fight. During this Mortensen is completely naked. His full frontal nudity is difficult to view not only because…well…Aragon’s personal hobbit is on display – but because his nudity, in light of viciousness of the attack, serves to bring an uncomfortable vulnerability to the scene. Many will be disgusted by the violence and frank sexual content. Some will claim the adult content is unneeded or at least too casual. I’d argue that the seemingly gratuitous nature of the sex and violence replicates how gratuitous they are when performed in real life. In an age when Hollywood is all too willing to show girls being tortured to death on screen (Hostel, Saw II, Wolf Creek) without a meaningful moral structure condemning the acts, seeing a piece treating violence in such an honest fashion is almost a relief.

Again, this is a very harsh movie. The blunt view of violence and criminality will be too much for many audiences and makes this a hard film to fully recommend. If you are able to handle the rough stuff, you’ll find this an intelligent and striking film. If you have any concerns about the content at all you’re probably best served by simply skipping this one. It’s a good film but it’s not worth it if you have problems with raw material.


Cautions: Blood, gore, violence, frank sexual acts, there's tons to be cautious about here.


Worldview: In a way this film paints a valuable look at what sin can and will do when left to fester. Morality, when discarded, is a difficult thing to regain and impossible to hold when one doesn't turn from their sin. At one point Nikolai claims he died when he committed his first crime as a kid - he was right. Those who fail to cast their sins aside are the living dead and will find no peace.


Cross-posted at Good News Film Reviews