Apr
23

The use of violence in open source productions

Posted in Events, Random Fluff by sacha

The day after the BBB premiere Ton was a member of a panel at a conference called ‘Economies of the Commons’, where topics as ‘financing open source and open content projects’ were discussed. Before the panel started Ton gave a presentation during which he also showed material from BBB. During the panel discussion there was a question from an audience member for Ton.

Taken from here:

The last major topic that was raised concerned the narrative of the Big Buck Bunny film, just released by Blender. Anthony McCan asked why open source productions can’t steer clear from the use of violence, as violence evokes violence. Ton Roosendaal replied that this was the best way to show the technical abilities capable by the Blender rendering software and that creative freedom in the way these technological abilities are displayed is highly regarded.

While I was listening to this on some audiostream, I understood this audience member had a North Irish background and witnessed a lot of violence in his life. I believe he just wondered if the ethical question about using violence in projects made for an entire community was raised.

Unfortunately the text above mixed up Ton’s reply; it almost seems like he encourages violence! His real answer was of course that the development of Blender comes first. And in order to make a project like this work, the best artists of the community are invited and are given this creative freedom.

Growing up in a world of violence is not a joke, but what worries me the most is that some people from this world are unable to distinguish real violence from the cartoony violence we know from Looney tunes and Tom and Jerry… and soon from BBB.

Peace,

Sacha

Rabbit and bow

Violence in Big Buck Bunny? I have no idea what you’re talking about…

118 Responses

  1. jim ww Writes:

    i think it is a valid question, but i think we actually need MORE cartoon violence. we need to reinforce the difference between the conscious release of anger, and the actual physical release. a simple concept, which many people cannot comprehend. maybe we can beat it into them? well, we can imagine it, anyways…

  2. Gianmichele Writes:

    Mmmmm…I can understand such a situation, but this kind of discussion usually never come to a balance. I had to say that as human we can choose…so if something is not for your taste, find something else.

  3. jim ww Writes:

    to qualify my statement further, i am a frustrated artist, constantly self editing my work, so as to not offend. which detracts from my very real anger, and compromises my emotional outlet. art is about personal expression, isn’t it? but not if it meant for general popular consumption. which creates another conflict, and possibly reinforces the point of the argument. if our art is angry, what does that say about the society which is creating it? not that we should subvert it, but that we should confront that, and ask why? or we could just make a rating system, and committees to enforce it, and further obscure what is really a simple issue. hm. i didn’t realize this was going to be a rant. sorry. perhaps you should not address complicated social issues? ha!

  4. chris Writes:

    I think that was the point of the question. If we CAN choose, why do we choose as a culture to view violence as entertainment.

  5. red Writes:

    So, let’s ban chess… It’s an abstract form of war…

  6. Manuel R. Ciosici Writes:

    I think that there is a great need for violence in movies and this is simply because that is what most people want to watch. I personally like non-violent movies, but if I were to make a movie that should impress an entire community, I would too choose violence, moderately. And as stated above, Blender development comes first and we must not forget that a great majority of games require violence and developing Blender in that way is a necessary choice.

  7. Jan Morgenstern Writes:

    It shouldn’t be left unnoted that excessive violence has a long tradition in open source culture. Open-source games like “Adventure”, “Rogue” or “Nethack” - as popular as morally depraved - routinely reward their players for a most reckless and anti-social behaviour. What’s more, users of “Linux” and other open-source systems have to put up with using self-speaking commands such as “killall” on a daily basis.

  8. The use of violence in open source productions | Guide Open Source Writes:

    [...] ReviewSaurus wrote an interesting post today onHere’s a quick excerptThe day after the BBB premiere Ton was a member of a panel at a conference called ‘Economies of the Commons’, where topics as ‘financing open source and open content projects’ were discussed. Before the panel started Ton gave a … [...]

  9. Olson W. Writes:

    “I think that there is a great need for violence in movies and this is simply because that is what most people want to watch.”
    the question should be raised so that “why people wants violence ?”
    Catroonish violence is not different from “real” violence… it is just a more bearable form of.
    The whole problem comes from the social basis we are all raised, that praise violence and hate instead of love and cooperation. And the fact that in order to compete in the capitalist world, you HAVE to make some sort of violence.
    Unfortunately, blender community is not different from that point of view (see how many blender games use violent themes), and the blender instituut even cooperate with US army to virtualise battleground … so who said Ton was AGAINST violence ? He certainly not promote it, but … he is not Ghandi neither.

  10. Dusty Writes:

    Hmmmm, it is a good debate, ratings and such need to be applied to open films as much as any other.
    I think it unfair to say the open films insist on violence. There are many I have seen out there that do not have violence in.
    In big buck bunnies case it’s cartoon violence. Since the days of Tom and Jerry people have speculated that this violence is not a good influence on children, but there is a big difference between that and say a certain zombie movie that has just come out.
    I feel that films like The Hostel and the Hills have eyes have allot to answer for in this respect. They are violent for the sake of it and go out of their way to be twisted and disturbing. Cartoon violence is not the same as blood and gore, or the gratuitous hurting of another human being for no other reason than it makes shock impact on the viewer.
    Cartoon violence is comical fun that could not be achieved in real life, while screen blood and gore is where the real issue lies.
    Those people who try and reenact a film by killing people will always try and replicate a blood and gore film of some kind.
    When have you ever heard of a man killing his wife with a bowling ball because he saw bugs bunny do it?

  11. Dusty Writes:

    Wait a min? killall? LOL
    Linux makes us subliminal killers because we type the word kill over and over again!!
    Oooooo now there is a theme for an open movie!

  12. ton Writes:

    Wow, do we cooperate with the US army? Coolness, please tell me where to send the invoice!

    -Ton-

  13. Olson W. Writes:

    -> ton : I just remembered a quite disputed post on blendernation some time ago where Campbell told you helped him on his project with USarmy … maybe this was not true so ? Or I remember wrongly … this was titled “MetaVR uses Blender in Detailed VR Training for Baghdad Combat Studies” .. but unfortunately not anymore in the archive …

  14. ROUBAL Writes:

    If violence must be avoided in animations, I will have to redo my last one, because it shows a shark eating a small fish. But if I redo it with the shark kissing the fish, any child looking at the scene will believe that sharks are our friends, and one day he may be eaten because he will have tried to kiss a shark !
    So, violence in movies can be informative and helpful !o)

  15. polka Writes:

    What a stupid debate… seriously. And what a strange question in the first place. Even IF I took the position of someone, who’s against violence in games/movies/etc. why should Open Software be required to fulfill this more than any other Software?

  16. Metsys Writes:

    I was actually thinking about this a few months ago. “A bunny gets back big time.” Every CG short film that I’ve seen on the internet that had “cartoony” violence was also quite gory. I was pretty confident that Peach wouldn’t go that route—although I’m not sure because I haven’t actually seen BBB yet, but the trailer seemed to suggest that it in fact wouldn’t—but when the characters are 3D and more realistic, the violence somehow becomes less comical and more real for some people because the characters appear to be more real.

    I know a lot of people bring up the argument that you need to be able to distinguish real violence from fake violence when talking about the representation of such in media. But it’s essentially redirecting the issue to the maturity of the audience and away from the creators. It does have a lot to do with the audience. You don’t want youngsters seeing some types of violence because they are learning through observation and imitation, and there are a lot of stupid teenagers (and adults) that just don’t know any better. But fake or not, it does have an effect on everyone. That’s why violence–and sex if I may add–is used as much as it is in story telling because of the psychological effect it has on us by viewing it.

    The effects are usually very short term and leave shortly after the scene is over, but the power of story telling and imagery is quite strong and can linger for a very long time. Our memory allows us to replay scenes on demand and even when we don’t want to, which is why the argument of “If you don’t like what you see then stop watching it,” is a weak one because they’ve already been exposed to it and have now committed what they saw to memory.

    Enough of the same story told over generations influences entire cultures for good and bad. Stories can become a window into parts of our world that we don’t understand very well, and people do make decisions based on it. Take the CSI Effect for example.

    My issue with using violence in storytelling isn’t so much that it’ll turn people into homicidal maniacs (because on it’s own it does not), but that it says a lot about the characters in my story who resort to it, and using too much of it may suggest something about my talent as a writer. Not that every story has to be pleasant, but people will judge the worth of a film by it’s intentions and execution of using violence to make the audience feel uncomfortable, getting excited through action packed scenes, or laughing at slapstick humor.

    Again, I haven’t seen BBB yet, but doing something cartoony like this with slapstick and everything is probably just fine. Anthony McCan’s concern might be more about wishing for more creativity out of the open source community in the art that’s produced because so much of what’s out there is violent, or why the idealism of “for everyone” isn’t reflected in the content of the film. Or it really could be because he believes that violence is bad. But either way it’s something for writers to think about.

  17. Johan Writes:

    Inevitable that someone should raise that question.

    I think it is difficult for entertainers to stay away from violence, because violence is a way to make something look real and exciting. ‘Danger’ also usually translates into a greater concern for the characters.

    I know in Samurai Jack they ducked that issue by making Samurai Jack kill robots.

    I think people should examine the ‘message’ of their movie and see how violence contributes or detracts from it. If all else fails- turn your villains into robots (before killing them).

  18. ROUBAL Writes:

    Action is an attractive part of movies. The first purpose of movies is to show actions before telling a story. It is for what cinema has been invented : Showing movement, and so action.

    The border between action and violence in movie is very narrow, and it is very difficult to stay only on the side of action without showing some violence…

  19. Mike Futcher Writes:

    You can depict violence without promoting it - there are many violent antiwar films.

  20. olme Writes:

    >> roubal
    It’s true that cinema shows movement, but violence is not the essence of action and there is a lots of movies without violent actions. in fact there is also other modes for the images in cinema (as analysed by philosopher Gilles Deleuze) that have not violence, and not even “movement”(!) as a motive. I think the tendency for film toward violence is more related to some kind of “frustration relief/creation” and the socio-political context that to the nature of cinema. And creators of BBB are not out of the epoch and context, so in trying to reach a broad public they express and use what is common in the hollywood cinema : action, and violence, at a certain level. (yes I was quite estonished to see those picture of Rambo-Bunny … but as I havn’t seen the movie, I can’t judge where it goes … :) )

  21. Sam Brubaker Writes:

    If the level of violence in Big Buck Bunny is enough to raise some issues, I wonder what the feedback for Project Durian will be like…

  22. Schiz Writes:

    @Olson W.
    “And the fact that in order to compete in the capitalist world, you HAVE to make some sort of violence”…It’s interesting Olson, how you tie capitalism to violence. Now there is a correlation between competition and violence but don’t go sticking capitalism in there for the thrill of your socialist ego. It doesn’t matter what type of economy is churning away you will always have competition and violence. Should that ever go away there will be no human nature and in return there will be hordes of mono-zombies walking the planet. Wake up…

  23. Metsys Writes:

    @Schiz: Depending on where he’s from, referring to capitalism is simply referring to the business world in general. Saying that he’s doing it for the thrill of his socialist ego is making a huge assumption.

    Bringing the discussion back on topic, the point is that aggressive behavior in both entertainment—and as was suggested earlier—in real life, and even things like business, is commonplace. And I think that’s why Anthony McCan brought it up. Does violence need to be so common in open source productions, or at least as common as everywhere else? Can it steer clear from it? Can it do it some other way?

    I think every media can and does, but I don’t think the fact that it’s open source affects the the content any differently than if it was a studio production. Should it though? Personally I think all content producers should be more responsible in the content they create and how it’s marketed. But it would be nice to see the open content community be the first to raise the bar.

  24. Veronica Writes:

    Doesn’t open source stay for freedom?

    Why should open source be subject to special ulterior “rules” some people imagine? Seriously, open source is open source and it does not have to and usually does not claim to be more than that.

    Whether violence effects people or not is not my point. The question is not IF open source CAN stay clear from violence, the question is, WHY SHOULD it have to?

  25. Alexander Writes:

    The violence in television, not a reason to be a violent person, this has shown people to it like Michael Moore in documentary like ” For Bowling Columbine” , where it demonstrates that to see violent films in the television it is not an influential factor.

  26. Ben Writes:

    That’s pretty simple:
    - the goal of the artist is to impress, to distract
    - the goal of the viewer is to be impressed and be distracted

    Violence do both and that can be easy to do, like a masturbation or eating sugar.

    I personally think there are already too much useless violent medias. Using violence in media must be here to help understanding real violence, and to solve them. Even in this cases a misunderstanding can be done, like with the gadfathers or scareface ; people take them as examples of behaviours..

    I find kill bill great, but I also love my neighboor totoro ; after the first I think to kill, after the second I think in a “healthy way”
    why not promote over the healthy behaviors?

  27. dusty Writes:

    Did Nathan kill everyone after the film project was over, because they kept telling him he looked like Buck? I was just wondering if working on a “violent” cartoon makes you evil!
    >:D

  28. campbell barton Writes:

    @Olson W, people tend to help each other in the blender user/developer community, without making value judgments on how they use software. incase your wondering I didn’t receive any special help from Ton that other devs wouldn’t have.

    And if you think this makes blender bad?
    http://www.military-training-technology.com/article.cfm?DocID=1857

    This is roughly my opinion on the matter,
    http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/03/10/torvalds_gpl_drm

  29. Numarul7 Writes:

    Sorry kids. Let`s be clear :

    Sow the violence not in the bad way but the violence in the hand of GOOD meaning , the usage of violence to do GOOD things

    Examples : Protect the earth,protect the life , protect your family.

    Violence it is a need where you have to use it when the normal talking it is useless.

    Violence it is not all bad.

    Bad it is the way you use it.

    Ii is violent to use a hammer to hit a little thing of metal to make something of wood ? Yes that is violence used to build something.

    SO stop arguing and think about the thing “Violence” in the all terms of usage .

    THE VIOLENCE IT IS NOT ALWAYS BAD it is an act like other , wee are violent all day when wee are sad angry or disapointed in life , violence live in our cells when wee have a flue ?

    Why can`t anybody see you must fight the VIRUS with it`s own VIOLENCE.

    The way life it is give it is Violent your mom had a pain in her then you are born ? SO ?

    Violence has 2 faces , you must see them .

    Now what it is Violent to show a kid how to survive in jungle ? Without getting starving …o yeah don`t eat the little thing that looks good on a stake yeah..it is meat…yeah …go to a supermarket ?! HUH ? I never seen a supermarket in a JUNGLE ?

    Hope you all see my “picture”.

  30. RH2 Writes:

    We should ban violence and stop hurting those polygons! These groups of vertexes may get their feelings hurt if we continue!

  31. rogper Writes:

    So which would be the better violence:
    Loony Toons violence or Dragon Ball violence!?
    I kind of prefer D.B. violence because it shows the real consequence of an act, When Goko punches someone that person will blead, therefore, because I already learned that by observing the movie, and I don’t want to hurt anybody, I’ll wont punch others :)

    Watching L.T., a considered better violence, I’ll may think that if I grab a shotgun and shoot somebody that person will only stay black and one second later will be perfectly fine :P

    I love Loony Toons Ok ;)
    Is just an ex. to make some kind of point.

    I think that far much worse than physical violence in a movie would be psychological violence…

  32. DramaKing Writes:

    I think it’s a valid question, but I think that this cartoon violence is entirely acceptable.

    In other words, I think that you took the right position on this.

  33. Al Capone Writes:

    Thats a valid point. If he express violent s, what does that say about the artist who creates it.

  34. Alex Writes:

    Was there this much discussion about violence when Elephants Dream was release?
    Poor Elmo got slapped around the face for trying to listen to the phone.

    Now! I’m a sociopathic face slapper!

    NOT!

  35. anthoni_c Writes:

    Violence is a part of life if people can’t deal with it that is their own fault.

  36. Foot Writes:

    Great shot of the bunny!

  37. Matt Writes:

    I’m just worried about the poor butterfly…

  38. jin choung Writes:

    all good stories and all good movies are essentially about TWO THINGS:

    1. conflict
    2. relationships

    and the path of least resistance and easiest way to go is to slide all the way into VIOLENCE and SEX.

    to merely CONTAIN violence is not really a moral deficit and to not have violence is not necessarily a virtue.

    violence is as human nature as our intellect, our ability to love.

    and violence is a tool that kept us safe from predators and warring tribes. in modern man, it just needs to be channeled appropriately toward small defenseless animals and lawyers.

  39. Cinmay Writes:

    I have a 2.5 year old daughter and she watches a lot- of 3D movies. (Perhaps mommy and daddy being two blender heads has something to do with it ;) ) Her favorite 3D clip is the trailer for The Simpsons Movie with the bunny that jumps around dancing so we expect grate things from BBB :)

    She does and says everything the characters in the movies she watches says and does. If she sees a character beating another character she turns to us and smiles and starts to beet us. There are some Disney and Pixar movies we just don’t show her because she is a copy cat. I am worried that BBB will be to violent for her. And I strongly disagree that violence is necessary to get a good story. Conflict is essential in a story but it does not have to express itself through violence.

  40. olme Writes:

    “violence is the last resort of the incapable” I.Asimov in “Foundation”

    I liked Elephant Dream because it adressed violence in a rather interesting way, by showing a psychological conflict becoming “reality”. It showed “symbolic violence” with Elmo being pressurised, and that pressure exploding back.
    It showed the world is what we make of it, the one who seed violence will harvest violence.

  41. pKrime Writes:

    I usually respect other’s points of view, but this is one of the dumbest questions ever! Man, it’s a story, I’ve never seen a story bulling someone. People should be indignate about real life happenings instead that staying there looking for the evil in cartoons.

    About DB violence vs Toon violence, I prefer the latter: through his violence, Gokus gains respect and friendship, I just think this is nonsense. Just my thought anyway.

    …killall killall killall!

  42. Goos Writes:

    !!! WHAT A DISCUSSION !!!
    I hope there is no Bunny out there watching the movie!!!! They will become wild animals after, dig your self in and hide for the Big Bunny. When I was young I was reading cartoons like Suske en Wiske, wow Lambik was violent he was holding a complete tank and shooting around, now I’m violent doing the same all day.

    Watch Bowling for Columbine from Micheal Moore, he tries to understand why American society is so more violent then the Canadian. Canadians have almost same amount of guns watching the same (violent)movies but they are not violent.

    By the way can Bunnies really make arrow’s and bent??? Didn’t now that.

  43. Laurens Writes:

    Here’s an idea for the next blender movie: less violence, more sex!

  44. Eric Writes:

    Also, it’s fcking cartoon violence. Does anyone get mad at Tom and Jerry? Seriously….get a life. If it was meant to look all photorealistic and had violence, that’s one thing. But this is just a cartoon.

  45. rogper Writes:

    And what about Durian!?
    Action, explosions, fighting… a litle bit difficult to do without violence ah! ;)

    I don’t know about making arows’s and bent, but I guarantee you would not like to make a rabbit furious… those guys are animals :P

  46. Al Capone Writes:

    I get mad at Jerry, I want Tom to beat the shite out of Jerry.

  47. Jonny Writes:

    Really nice discussion. In germany there’s a similar discussion about first pirson shooters. But someone should tell them how nasty even cartoons are. I hope anyone gets the irony…

    I hope this won’t change the plans for Durian, cause Blender needs support for explosions for example!!!

    Don’t mess up violence with nice entertainment. Though I didn’t see BBB right now and can’t say anything about the violence shown there :p .

    mfg,
    Jonny.

  48. Ashworth Writes:

    This is the oldest and most frustrating arguments for artists. The argument however had been solved a long time ago, when Plato felt the same as the no violence crowd, and Aristotle created their philisophical arguments for/against artistic freedom. Plato is worried that art influences life too much and the the violence in art must be inciting the violence in his life. Aristotle, having a far better education knew that the violence in the world predates violence in art, and that art in any form(violent, perverse, or peacefull, etc.) is important not as influence(wich art is a weak medium for) but for Catharsis,(see wikipedia for defenitions) wich actually has the oposite effect on people, cleasing them of their emotions(be they good or bad) by allowing the viewer to experience the emotions in a safe environment. If you search around enough you can find that all forms of art use violence as an acceptable (sometimes very popular) subject matter. More interesting is that peoples that are limited in exposure to artistic subject matter are more often capable of more violence, if they are put in a situation in wich violence is likely. We can see this in present day countries with limited freedoms, as well as the historical peoples of great violence, they all limited their peoples access to art they found distaistfull.

  49. adb Writes:

    Most comments here overlook that fact that cartoons are watched by children, who don’t have the same ability to make moral judgements that adults do.

    The frontal lobes that are responsible for moral judgement are not fully developed until the age of 20 or so. Cartoons therefore, should not give the message that violence is OK.

  50. jin choung Writes:

    “cartoons are for children”… yeeeesh…. that’s a pretty hated notion for us non children in the u.s.a. not that way in japan. it doesn’t HAVE to be this way. and, this isn’t being marketed at children is it? i assume all the blender devotees and fans who’ve ponied up for the dvds aren’t little kids?

    actually, i really adore the decision for starting with elephant’s dream for this reason… it differentiates itself from the “also ran” hollywood crowd by not being kid-centric.

    haven’t seen bbb but i would actually respect it the more if it was not kid centric either.

    why must children rule the world? they can have it when i’m done with it.

    (that last part is a joke)

    jin

  51. unk won Writes:

    funny you mentioned this because I actualy plan on working on a various non children centric projects with Blender mainly specializing in Horror movie effects, and making something both ultra realistic, I’m also a cartoony but still NOT for children with Blood, Gore, and even sex are all included. Something around the lines of the Heavy Metal comics and the 70s film. So it should be a interesting experiment to see how this all plays out with my project. Though I remember a time when open source game development software was used by white suprimist groups to teach children to attack africains, jews, etc. Thats where things get sticky.

  52. Anthony Writes:

    I watched a lot of violent movies cartoon or live action while I was growing up yet still I grew up a law abiding citizen.

    It’s not all about tv or movies but more about how parents guide their kids.

  53. Big Fan Writes:

    Although it is of course possible to tell a decent storey without incorporating ‘dark elements’ or gratuitous violence etc. I dont recall any requirement that something ‘open source’ has to be more pure than holy water.
    Personally I find the counter culture and evangelical association of open source somewhat perplexing and unworldly.
    I guess if Blender is a conspicuous pioneer - and it tends to champion itself that way - then there is some degree of baggage that comes with it even if the participants wish to travrl light. That doesnt mean ‘Blender Studios’ needs to adopt a Walt Disney ‘for families’ ethic or morality but then again there might be some sense in having a content guideline just as I have suggested there should be a voluntary code to cover work hours and conditions etc.
    I think it is inevitable exposure to a wider audience will bring more scrutiny not necessarily reasonable or directly applicable to the globally distributed association that is Blender…
    To finish I could say - At no time were real animals used or harmed in this picture and dont try this at home.

  54. jin choung Writes:

    absolutely,

    why in the world is puritanism or prudishness an aspect of the open source movement? that’s not at all a necessary connection.

    good luck with your projects unk won. make em good. i think violence and sex are completely valid (if not necessary) and can be done well or poorly. do it well.

    as for games made to attack minority groups, that’s not sticky at all. the issue there is hate, racism, prejudice. violence is literally like a weapon and its morality depends on who and how it’s wielded.

  55. Kirado Writes:

    The world is violent and dangerous place.. get over it!! In order for us to live something else must die eg. plants or animals.. it’s a fact of nature. That comment they made a about Ton was totally disingenuous.. I support Ton all the way!!

    Learn to tell the difference between reall violence and that on TV.

    An example of real violence would be what happened to me TODAY which I now find totally IRONIC after seeing this post.

    I heard screaming and shouting from my neighbours house and the next thing I know some thief comes running down my alley way of my house(and yes this has happened many times).. running towards a wall covered in very sharp spikes which I know he can’t get over.. by the way I live in a country where people get killed all the time by criminals who just want to steal a cellphone.. so this is a real dangerous situation..and a very good chance he will attack me. I grab something I have lying around for these situations and chase him out the house as he climbs over the spikes on my front gate and down the street. Eventually I have to stop chasing him because I’m wearing only socks and I left my house open..I could’ve easliy have left a door open and this guy could’ve come in… we also have cleaners once a week who could been attacked when they clean the house.. SO pls don’t lecture me on violence in TV shows or cartoons.

    People were violent before any of that and always will be. Do I hate movies because this guy tried to break into my house last week?NO. Do I hate all women because some have treated me in a sexist manner..? NO.. that would be stupid.

    But I do hate stupid people who try and break into my house and place my life in danger!!

    People need to grow up and learn right from wrong. It’s not that hard.

    And to the guy who says his kid repeats everything she sees– Well she must have learnt it from you mate.. so time to work on those parenting skills because you’re the only one who can shape your kid into being an adult who knows right from wrong.

    Sheesh lets blame everyone else for our own problems. Apricot team you did a great job!! Don’t take these silly comments at all seriously. Sorry for the traumatise post but it’s been a hectic day ;-)

  56. MrGreen Writes:

    Yay Peace man!!
    Let the ideas clash but not the hearts!!

  57. Ashworth Writes:

    If we did everything for the kiddies… don’t you think the world would really suck for the adults. I’m 30 years old and if people keep telling me I can’t have cartoons created for people with brains, I’m going to be very upset. If you have children shut up and watch out for your children don’t bitch at artists for creating things not even intended for them… OK…

  58. ccherrett Writes:

    Ashworth:

    Hey you think people in war torn countries kill the way they do because of a lack of violent art? …..

    Or possibly because they just watched their mother and father and oh! brothers and sisters get blown up and now want to kill the person who did it?

    No must be the lack of violent art.

  59. Bmud Writes:

    Violence starts psychologically. If a form of media envokes a spark that chainlinks to memories, primal instinct, or whatever. This is natural.

    I’m thankful that my parents allowed me to grow up instead of sheltering me. Problems like this one usually just make me roll my eyes.

    However, in recent years I’ve been more conscious of the question “if kids will find my own work naturally, would it be appropriate?”

    Example: consider that a little kid on google wants to find a cartoon about a bunny. This is very likely. What happens after that depends entirely on their upbringing… and I would ask that we try not to discuss all that because it is an impossible topic.

  60. jin choung Writes:

    haha… that’s not fair! you brought it up! : )

    but actually, it’s NOT an impossible subject.

    if we all had to limit our expression so as to not upset or unbalance the most unstable or volatile among us, what could possibly be expressed except for perhaps the milder episodes of sesame street?

  61. Big Fan Writes:

    hmm well there is a fair bit of violence in Muppet characters…Miss Piggy beating on Kermit for instance

    on reflection though maybe the audience member has a valid point about depicted violence in BBB - havent seen the movie of course..- but I dont think it was something done on purpose for approval ratings with chuck norris fans.
    as I said something like this goes with the territory of wider public consumption.
    probably Ton hasnt considered this aspect to success before.
    perhaps he should put a little time into thinking more formally about what the issues big studios most likely have full time advisors for

  62. Falcron Writes:

    KUNG FU PANDA!

  63. Mike Writes:

    Is violence any more abundant in open source media than traditional, closed-source media? While BBB or EP may have some violence, its certainly no more than what’s on TV or movies.

    Here’s a question: With everyone able to modify the content of something like BBB, would someone, or a interest group remove violence and replace it with something else?

    E.G. a Christian organization downloads BBB and changes the message to something about going to Church? It’d be interesting to see….

  64. Maluminas Writes:

    If your kid turns to you and beats you up when she sees it on TV, tell her it not ok. Teach her it hurts you and hurting people never helped anyone. Its called “parenting”. Whats worse than violence is trying to hide the fact that it exists.

  65. Big Fan Writes:

    aside from the encitement to wanton violence issue there are a few things not covered yet and that is: the under representation of black rabbits and gay rodents, and more seriously the genetically modified bend resistant grass…
    what does Ton have to say in defence of open source software in these instances?

  66. Jazzman65 Writes:

    Hey what about all the violence in Star Wars. That would be a very different movie without the violence.

  67. ccherrett Writes:

    Maluminas:

    I take it from your post that you have experience as a parent?

    I certainly do and have found very happy mediums of controlling what my children see. We do not pretend it does not exist but at the same time do not fall head first in the other ditch and exposes our eyes to anything that comes.

    That said, I think there is a big difference between BBB and a horror film.

  68. ccherrett Writes:

    Big Fan:

    I hear you are Robin Rowe. Is that true?

  69. Aleksej Writes:

    IMO, the argument about the “violence” of hammering a nail to build something is pointless. Bringing Elephants Dream up is not exactly pointless, but still there is a great difference between that and the BBB trailer.

  70. Aleksej Writes:

    IMO, the argument about the “violence” of hammering a nail to build something is pointless, since it is a different meaning of the word. Bringing Elephants Dream up is not exactly pointless, but still there is a great difference between that and the BBB trailer.

  71. Dre Writes:

    heh, if you think “killall” is violent, google for “psdoom”

  72. Socceroos Writes:

    Its interesting hearing everyone’s perspectives on the matter (even if they are heated).

    I’m a Christian so my views are a bit different, but its very informing to see how others feel about the issue.

  73. nice bunny Writes:

    what makes you ppl think that cartoonish violence is any better than a ‘real’ one? if for one, i would say it nicely shows how things can be solved - even without any bad conciseness, using a knife/bomb/weapons and with a smile on my face.

  74. nice bunny Writes:

    and please leave ED out of this, has really little to do with ‘real’ violence.

  75. RNS Writes:

    People need to grow up on this issue.
    violence is part of our normal living way of life, how we define it use for whether
    by means of learning or political experiment of a new system.Is how nation are born and destroy.Violence is all around us in religions text books and above in the Universe.So get over it! More Coffe!!!

  76. Aristocrata Writes:

    Great Ton! We want to see a lot of little animal members and blood flying in the screen.

  77. your mamma Writes:

    dang man, dont let this be the thread that the blog rests on…all that work and then a negative blog post…put up somthing positive, somthing exciting, somthing people can look forward too!!

  78. grafixsuz Writes:

    I tend to agree with your mamma on this. About time to add something new. I know this is an important issue and one I am very concerned about having young children myself. But I do think this needs to be moved down the list of threads that could possibly have been put up during the past week… Just a thought

  79. Tadd Writes:

    Really - violence is violence. Whether it’s a big bunny smacking something or a scene from GTA shooting a granny. There is no difference.

    HOWEVER - I think whining about aspects of violence is like whining about fat in french fries. If you don’t want it - just don’t watch it. Don’t want to get a lard butt - stop eating McDonald’s every day.

    Look around you. From the beginning of movies and television we had violence. The Three Stooges, for example, smacked each other around and people said “FUNNY!”. Cave men would smack each other in the head with a stick and laugh.

    I understand growing up in violence you naturally wonder why it’s necessary. Well, it’s life. News, cartoons, movies, the neighbors house … it’s just there. From squashing a spider to all out war, you can’t get away from it.

    And what would the Big Bunny do to the intrusive little pests? Tea party? Makes for good cartoon action I’d say …

    Yeah, this rant may or may not have made sense, but I did it …

  80. Clean3d Writes:

    Quite a debate…

    Forgive me for not reading all of it, but I hoped I didn’t need to, since I think the question I have is somewhat new to the discussion so far, and that is: Is Peach a film for artists or for audiences?

    The point has been brought up that if a person doesn’t like what they see, then they can choose to stop watching it. This doesn’t require the artist to alter their creative vision to fit someone else’s beliefs.

    However, if these open-projects are created to promote Blender and show its competency, should it not be taken into consideration that to reach the widest audience some artistic avenues may need to be relinquished?

    Just my 2 very-small-monetary-values. ;) Can’t wait to see the film!

  81. Jan Morgenstern Writes:

    Clean3d: That’s a dangerous road to go down for any reason. Ultimately, it leads to material that’s watered down to a point where most people feel indifferent about it, and that’d be by far the worst kind of promotion (and art, for that matter).

  82. caricc Writes:

    Violence in cartoons. Go back to the animators from the 1940’s and 50’s. They will probably laugh at you. Even today’s animators will have a good chuckle.
    I was watching a few cartoons the other night with my kids. There was more violence in the 30 minutes that the program ran than in about an hour of other programs. This is perfectly normal per the standards that have been set down from previous generations of animators. If someone doesn’t care fro it then read a book. Opps it’s there too.

  83. your mamma Writes:

    this is bull man, dont let this happen, all that hard work on the movie, and now a negative blog entry, put up somthing new and up beat, seems like a waste to put all that time into the movie and now have a week long disscussion at the end of it on violence, this movie was about fun, lets make a “fun” new topic, this one is a waste and total bullsh…..

  84. Clean3d Writes:

    @Jan: Very true, art shouldn’t be watered down to the point of mediocrity. My point wasn’t that the Blender Foundation should try and please everybody, though. Just that this sort of feedback tells who the audience is (existing and potential Blender users) that needs to be impressed by this sort of project, and what they would like to be impressed by most.

    Anyway, I’ve rewritten this comment about 3 or 4 times now trying to keep it short and still fit everything I was trying to say in. I give up ;)

  85. ccherrett Writes:

    @Jan having some boundaries is not a dangerous thing but a wise move.

    my 2 cents

  86. Cell Regeneration Writes:

    The Bible, the Koran, the Communist Manifesto, anime, Animal Planet — all these are riddled with violence. Should we rewrite, censor, or refilm (or should I say reshoot) them? If you don’t want violence stare at a still life for half an hour.

  87. ccherrett Writes:

    @Cell,

    This is such a tough conversation to have being that I have not seen the film, so how can I say what I think of it.

    In general having some way to define your own limits is a good thing. Now the only trick is to figure out what your measure is. Mine is The Bible.

    Enjoy!

  88. Jan Morgenstern Writes:

    @ccherrett: I wasn’t suggesting to not have any boundaries. It’s the idea of creating boundaries for the purpose of broadening the audience that I take issue with.

  89. ati Writes:

    La pire des violences c’est la censure !
    Et la pire des censures c’est l’auto-censure. Toute création soumise à des limites franchissables s’affaiblie. Blender est un outil fabuleux dans la mesure où il permet de franchir la limite des licences. Alors ne commençons pas à en poser de nouvelles. Créons et laissons les spectateurs libres de juger.
    La paix n’est possible que lorsque les pulsions ont trouvé d’autres voies que celles des actes pour s’exprimer : Cinéma, littérature, théâtre, danse, peinture, sculpture, musique…
    Voici une petite animation pour conclure :
    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x5a6eb_peacetypo_creation

  90. TBOL3 Writes:

    So, have you ever thought of this the other way around? Maybe it’s actually the fact that more and more people like violence, thus they like to watch it in films.

  91. Habe Writes:

    I dont mind violence in movies. I dont like Gross movies. You have a choice to watch or not to watch. I dont beleive because people like violence is why they watch it in films either. I dont like violence in my everyday life, but I dont mind watching it in a movie or playing a game with violence. It’s ENTERTAINMENT only. Hopefully you think the same, if not you may need to get some help.

  92. Sorcerer Writes:

    Violence (normal amounts of…) should always be allowed: it’s a part of our reality, a part of real life…

    Parents should be very aware that it is THEIR role to teach children about what’s real & normal and what isn’t.

    Watch violent stuff together with your kids and discuss it (in a non-moralising manner). I wish all people would do this. Just ‘hiding’ or censoring violence is no good option as children/people will probably always be confronted with it at some point in life. Moreover, children could get fascinated because it’s a ‘taboo’ or ‘forbidden’.

    Violence in open source should be like drinking alcohol: in responsible amounts!

  93. atomic1fire Writes:

    Even some children movies can be considered violent in certain areas for the further of the storyline
    You cant have a villain who doesn’t try to hurt people
    Cartoon violence is more comical then offensive because tom and jerry for example are just a cat and a mouse with comically opposing personalities playing a game of literal cat and mouse
    Video game violence is usually another part of gameplay but for the record I disagree with games that break the law for the sake of breaking the law
    war games serve a historical point in most cases
    and sport games that involve blood (albeit unrealistically sometimes) often basically reinstate the point that you should keep trying to get better at something if you really want it but you will get hurt doing so but you should get back on your feet.

  94. Ishmael Writes:

    Violence is the physical form of struggle between opposing forces, right? What story plot about struggle between good/evil or right/wrong can there be with some form of violence ( physical,mental or emotional)?

    When one person tries to force their views upon a resisting person with opposing views, there is struggle and thus, in some form, violence.

    I’d rather it be a form of cartoon violence that can be cathartic, than real violence.

    or…
    Consider that the vast majority of humor involves one person being screwed over, embarrassed or made to look dumb in some way.
    As Mel Brooks said, ” When I get a paper cut, its tragedy, but when someone else falls down a manhole and dies….that’s comedy.”

  95. BSkutt Writes:

    1 a: exertion of physical force so as to injure or abuse (as in warfare effecting illegal entry into a house) b: an instance of violent treatment or procedure

    Violence requires a force intending to injure or abuse. A film can not physically injure anyone so it is not strictly “violence” but a “portrayal of violence.”

    There is no such thing as “violence” in movies, only a “portrayal.”

    I guess my comment is pretty open ended, but I think it’s something to consider that violence can not literally exist in a film. Unless perhaps it is a documentary, but still its only a “record” of violence.

    I guess since history is a more “real” form of violence than a cartoon, does that mean we should censor history?

  96. Gabriel Writes:

    Is a real truth that humans have “violence” in his original programing, we only have to see our history, the most common word in it is “WAR”. Now, in this particular place in time, we have the elements to put that so call “violence” not against us but at our service, using this wonderfull elements (blender and all kind of digital art, besides other stuff)to make a very good laughs about it……..and for thouse worried abut the example given whit this kind of art to the new ones (children), wake up!!! they are not naive as we are, they KNOW!……..the programing is changing……

  97. Yamavu Writes:

    Violence in Cartoons has a long history. A coyote fally down a cliff, Mickey steps on Pete’s foot , just to name a few.

    BTW what has open source to do with violence. Sure I don’t wanna promote violence, but limiting free culture in the choice of themes just makes no sense to me at all. It’s the choice of the authors what they release. Distributors have to deal with youth protection laws anyway, if they even apply.

  98. kotakotakota Writes:

    Observing my friends, (since I am 15, all my friends are around that age.) I have seen them start off pretty peaceful, and then they start watching more and more violent things and playing more and more violent video games, and result in much more violent people. As a result, they decide that things such as playing with air-soft rifles and shooting each other, bleeding, and simulating a real battle is fun and amusing. I think that this is morally incorrect, and also, is disrespectful towards soldiers. Therefore violence in entertainment is generally not a good thing.

    However, we do have a choice to what we watch, so as long as people know the limits of the amount of violence they want to see, it is fine to have violence in certain situations, like an ever so friendly loony toon cartoon, or BBB

  99. luke Writes:

    Contrast and texture are important. Interspersing the quiet and gentle with bloody, brutal violence could lead to some stunning work. I don’t think we should limit our means of expression.

  100. Bart M Writes:

    Humans are selfish and violent. Period. That’s how we survived, that’s how is determined who is the leader of the group, how we get food, how we live. It’s a part of any culture, anywhere in the world, pretending it isn’t would be foolish.

    I really wonder what people expect when they raise kids telling them violence doesn’t exist. One day they will have to show up at school and be confronted with other kids who weren’t necessarely tought the same thing, and kids can be very cruel… Luckily they also learn quickly and WILL get to know and understand violence, if you want it or not - but it won’t be the way the parents actually want them to know it. If I ever have kids (and I helped raise my 12y younger brother), I want to be the one who teaches them what it is, and don’t want to leave that up to strangers nor it to be a real-life situation. And I don’t mean that I would be beating them up…

    Pretending towards a child violence doesn’t exist, is just foolish. When I was young I wasn’t allowed to have toy guns or weapons from my parents, so what did we do? We made them from wood or pretended a stick was a sword (which is a lot more painfull when you hit someone with it compared to some plastic sword btw). 2 cousins were raised without any candy, only on rare occasions they were allowed to have some. Now they’re becoming teenagers, and the only thing archieved by it is that right now they eat candy whenever they can and are starting to rebel against it. The unknown or forbidden is attractive, and kids will discover things like that. It’s like the day they discover what sex is, some parents try to protect them from that too. However, that day won’t come before were confronted with real-life violence. That’s the world we live in, live with it.

    I practiced judo starting at 7 - where they tought me how to fight in reality. It tought me violence and agression, but also how to control it. Isn’t that a lot worse than watching a cartoony movie? Yet that’s perfectly acceptable, and so is almost any sport. Sports are basically an expression of our basic strive to become an alfa-male/female, which is a competition between 2 or more sides and which will involve violence - in whatever form, not necessarely physical - at some point.

    Yet I didn’t end up to be a violent person, more on the contrary. I know very well what violence is and what it can do - I stopped practicing judo due to a few injuries too many, though I loved it. In training and competiton I knew that my opponents were close matches, but on the outside world I know what it can inflict - I know what it is and try to avoid it. When a kid isn’t tought what violence is and not aware of the concequences, it is I think a lot more dangarous. Kids WILL be confronted with violence. If it’s not now, it will be tomorrow. Or the next day. It’s a parent’s duty to teach their children what violence is, just as teaching them what is real and what not, and what’s good and bad is in our society.

    So far about violence. I somewhat understand why people make the link between opensource and ‘avoid violence’, they are both nice ‘ideals’, but not always too realistic. Both have fanatics and more liberal followers, and I don’t think there are many people who actually like to be confronted with real violence.

  101. Aleksej Writes:

    Simple violence in a movie may be boring. Maybe that’s a reason for its use in a movie that is supposed to showcase graphics?

  102. Michael Writes:

    What’s wrong with sharks! No need to teach that they’re violent monsters, perhaps they are just part of the cycle of life!

  103. joeri Writes:

    Arghh… what a dumb people here…
    Sorry folks. Even Sasha didnt get it.

    ” Also, it’s fcking cartoon violence. Does anyone get mad at Tom and Jerry? ”

    A story is a story, if its “only” a cartoon, then why watch it? To prove blender can render some frames??? Geez…

    Violence, or interesting violence, is about strugle! If a story depicts this strugle, or depicts how to overcome problems then its valid, if its “just for fun” then its evil and should be avoided. Seriously. … /me goes and plays some more GTAIV.

  104. Kasper Writes:

    Just a dog gone minute here people.
    Most of you seem to live in a bit of a dream world and that in itself is OK but when you are talking about censoreship then the first thing you need to ask is “for whom?”
    The answer is obviously, for CHILDREN and then we need to agree upon what age describes children that need to be protected. The general consensus on this according to the law in most western countries is 16 although I would venture to say that the age bracket 14 to 16 needs to be considered slightly differently.
    OK - now that we have established this we need to ask what we want our children to see because they do not have the maturity to make this decision for themselves.
    In this regard there are many opinions but I will tell you mine.

    Not in order of importance either:
    1 - NO VIOLENCE
    2 - NO SEXUAL STUFF
    3 - NO RACISM
    4 - NO BEHAVIOUR that can be regarded as anti social

    Make happy, funny and educative cartoons or leave it be.
    There is no excuse for any of this crap and any person who tells you otherwise is an intellectual idiot.
    My final statement is about this garbage that artists have some sort of special rights of freedom of expression. That is idiotic. I am an artist too.
    Artists are not special and “MUST” obey the law of the land and in many countries this means that eg if you put out PORN or Racist cartoons you will be prosecuted - so there goes your rights and rightly so!

  105. Anon Writes:

    The moral of the story is… if you use open software, butterflies will die.

  106. steff Writes:

    hi all. thanx to ton and all of bbb project for such profetionnalism ! really ! the point is that in cartoon the view of violence is no sense when you can watch on tv for kids itcht and scrathy in the simpsons adventures. and examples are not a few ! perhaps this guy thinks simply violence isn’t the way of making a movie but from my part it’s only the liberty of script which import and that BBB is a great demonstration of capabilities of the software. i’m part of a multi technic intellectual sometimes lol forum in france i love for freak project and real authors delights and sometimes not showing violence but suggering it by atmospheres can be richer but it’s another discussion. congratulations to all and pleaz continue as this i upload the movie in not full hd and the film is huge ! blender becomes essential and well bill gates haven’t understood anything primerely at web 2.0 so i don’t think he will understand anything to blender phylosophy hehe . thanx ton for answering him as this. liberty and open source on the web is important and the french communoty was against an appropriation by windows of blender. just to said in france the actual thinks. take care of sharks of the buzzness in 3d ton and don’t hesitate to continue the right way of free movies and games you have the power my bro’s lol

    best regards from france

    steff

  107. DaBoyz40+ Writes:

    I personally feel that you are too narrowly defining violence. Our society makes it very clear (and more so every day) that physical violence is unacceptable. What you’re ignoring, are the more common and acceptable forms of conflict. Emotional violence (the teen drama “Gossip Girl” springs to mind), economic violence (for this one, we’ll go to “The O.C.” where people with money treat people without money differently). These are types of violence which ARE damaging and are committed every day more commonly than physical violence yet are tolerated and indeed celebrated in our society.

    I’d sooner be used as a kite once (yes I watched BBB) than treated like trash from the wrong side of the tracks every day.

    I LOVE “BIG BUCK BUNNY”!!!!! That is some funny stuff and a great feature showcase for Blender.

  108. Aygun Abibula Writes:

    From my point of view the violence from BBB it,s some thing that it is happening on real life.How? let,s see.

    I’m a kind persson. I like to do some thing’s that i like. You see me smelling a flower , watching the sun rissing over the ocean and stuff like this and you start to do some bad things on me just becaus you dont like me. Well , here it come the idea Eye for an Eye. If you not let me alone and you are comming over me again and again and again i’ll show you how can it be. So , I make a plan and if you came again in my place i will kick you’re ass. Dont you think it’s fair enought ?

    The message behind the movie is. Let me live in peace. Let people be free.

    I Have an little word wich say,s :

    THE SNAKE WHO DOES NOT TOUCH ME CAN LIVE 1000 YEAR’S !

    Kind regards ,

    Aygun

  109. Ryan McDonough Writes:

    Obviously he missed the scene where the bunny actually saved the boss rodent from being spiked in a very gory way.

    Surely the message of this movie is to stand up for yourself,because we live in a world of violence and there’s not much BBB can do about that however once he stood up himself the level of violence dropped quite alot in that area.

  110. sean Writes:

    I’m surprised that I was not the only one that thought that BBB was too violent.
    What I see in the film is an overweight individual ( Buck ) that is picked on by others and takes revenge using violence.

    So the message of the film seems to be that if you get picked on, the thing to do is to resort to violence.

    With that said, everything else about the film was absolutely top notch. I have a new found respect for the program. Well done !

  111. Daniel Scott Writes:

    I think its primarily up to parents to filter what their children watch.

    But, I will say that any cartoon geared towards children should be developmentally appropriate and be aware that ANY character or behavior could be copied.

    As parents, if you don’t want a child to copy a behavior, don’t let them see it. As producers of children content, you should always be teaching by providing models for children to copy. I’m not saying to shield children from every day situations, but show them proper problem solving skills in dealing with them. I personally do not think that Buck is a role model I would want children to copy so I would wait until my children are at least 7 before exposing them to this kind of comedy. But that’s a parent’s call, not the producer’s.

  112. Ninjambitsusanikano Writes:

    Not all cartoons are made for children. Many adults and people in their 20’s often enjoy cartoons. People shouldn’t assume that just because it is an animation, that it’s made for kids. It is understandable that kids would perhaps portray what they see in a cartoon or animation because they are young and find it harder to draw a line between reality or fiction. There is a reason why games, animations and movies have ratings, to serve as a guideline for the parents. Anybody above the age of 16 should know that the world portrayed in a game or animation is different to the real world, and therefore so are the morals and ethics. If parents didn’t raise their children with healthy logic, then the developers behind games and animations shouldnt be blamed. Violence is anyway a part of life, most people with an I.Q. higher than 100 should know where to draw the line.

  113. Ninjambitsusanikano Writes:

    Another thing… Sean, not everything has to be interpreted or adapted to a real life scenario… It’s called FICTION\FANTASY.

  114. Ninjambitsusanikano Writes:

    Aaaaaand another thing haha… Not everything has a deeper message behind it. BBB is just fun, that’s all, and if anyone interprets it differently (or more seriously) then it should preferably stay their opinion.

  115. simon Writes:

    As Sean (#110) said, “everything ELSE about the film was absolutely top notch”. Good movies (including good animated movies) often depict plenty of violence: what they don’t very often do (although cheap, badly conceived movies do it all the time) is ask viewers to identify with a “hero” who turns out to be much the same as the “villain” except that he’s on “our side”.

    In better films, ethics are more or less universal: what makes the “baddies” bad is that they treat others without respect or dignity, and what makes the “goodies” good is that they have the courage to stick to those human values, even under pressure. The more immature, childish ethics of not-so-great movies are closer to “patriotism” and so forth, in which the baddies are simply “them” and the goodies are us, and it’s a happy ending when we inflict suffering on them (i.e. become ourselves what would be a “villain” in a decent movie that can tell a story from a broader perspective than that of the egocentric “me/us”).

    I was keen to show this movie to others as a demonstration of what the free software community can achieve, but as high-quality as it was technically, it’s obvious that nowhere near the same amount of thought went into the narrative as went into its technical production. The graphics etc looked like the craft of highly skilled adults: the story on the other hand did not.

    Like Sean said, everything ELSE was top notch: I just wish the writers had looked at some of the best animated films and noticed the other things, besides great animation, that made them great. So much about BBB is really excellent: it deserved a story of the same quality.

    So, unlike the majority who’ve posted here, I strongly agree with the original point made by Anthony McCan: given that it certainly is possible (as many good films have demonstrated) to tell good, entertaining stories without resorting to the dirt common “hero gets revenge” narrative, there was an obvious way that this movie could have been better, and it’s good that people are letting the BBB team know this so that work they do in future can be even better.

  116. edutiao Writes:

    First off, what a great achievement this is for the Free-software community! Congratulations! Now off to the discussion.

    Can’t help but to think of Adorno as i read about the film, and this thread:

    “Cartoons were once exponents of fantasy as opposed to rationalism. They ensured that justice was done to the creatures and objects they electrified, by giving the maimed specimens a second life. All they do today is to confirm the victory of technological truth reason over truth. A few years ago they had a consistent plot which only broke up in the final moments in a crazy chase, and thus resembled the old slapstick comedy. Now, however, time relations have shifted. In the very first sequence a motive is stated so that in the course of the action destruction can get to work on it: with the audience in pursuit, the protagonist becomes the worthless object of general violence. The quantity of organized of organized amusement changes into the quality of organized cruelty. The self- electors of the film industry (with whom it enjoys a close relationship) watch over the unfolding of the crime, which is as drawn-out as a hunt. Fun replaces the pleasure which the sight of an embrace would allegedly afford, and postpones satisfaction till the day of the pogrom. In so far as cartoons do any more than accustom the senses to the new tempo, they hammer into every brain the old lesson that continuous friction, the breaking down of all individual resistance, is the condition of life in this society. Donald Duck in the cartoons and the unfortunate in real life get their thrashing so that the audience can learn to take their own punishment” : Culture Industry, in Dialectic of Enlightenment

    Of course, the general idea being that culture as a commodity is transformed from an legitimate form of human expression (whatever that might be), to a dose of daily submission to the state of things - of the existing social structures, ultimately.

    He also makes a great case of the audiance not really coping with the scripts or the plots, but with the (always-improving) psychological techniques used on to write them. What drives the audience is not a good story, but a “well” told story, where plot elements are easily recognized, yet not too obvious, etc. Of course that was in an era without too many special effects, wich are todays blockbuster-makers (whilst the plots are getting ever stupider, IMO).

    That said, i do think we should move to making other types of animation, see for example, ANIMAMUNDI festival, there are tons of great ideas for an animation that don’t consist of more-of-the-same use-violence-because-its-an-easy-plot-device/because-we-can.

    Alas, a critique os the plot was comming, folks, you’ve just reached 1 mil persons!

  117. Ninjambitsusanikano Writes:

    Sometimes violence is fun haha.

  118. bad Writes:

    you all suck

Leave a Reply