Message lost in graphic violence

Rating: 1/10 (26 March 2012)

The underlying themes of this movie appear to have been redemption, fighting oppression, determination and perhaps other positive ideas, but sadly and unfortunately these are buried deep beneath the violence and gore typical of the Hollywood shock value system that values shock factor above such notions.
What's more disturbing is that the trend in shock violence and gore for most films was confined for the most part to adult (R) rated films - not that this stops younger people from seeing them, but at least such classification prevents the implication of a gross societal acceptance for such graphic imagery to some extent.
Not so with this film - by allowing a rating of PG-13, not only has the MPAA grossly neglected their duties in classifying age appropriate material, but it has allowed for such abject violence to be viewed as "acceptable" - even more so than before (e.g. ridiculously graphic video games) - by the teen/young adult population, with potentially far-reaching repercussions on a large subset of our society already faced with the difficulties of understanding their place in the larger world around them.
It seems we are always wondering: where does so much violence in our society come from? We watch the news, constantly aghast as we see people, particularly young people, acting out in amazingly violent and shocking fashion - seemingly "out of nowhere".
Yet here we are, charged with shepherding our youth, but instead of giving the care and attention we should about what our kids and teens are exposed to, we are constantly allowing them access to violence, more so than even adults, in the form of movies like these, video games, etc.
We already know full well they are in such a hurry to grow up and that when we allow them to see this they think this kind of exposure and ideology is "just part of growing up". We know that they look to adults for guidance as young people - what exactly are we showing them with images of wanton butchering, lifeless children's eyes, etc.?
Do we really think that teens, who deal with so much already in learning to understand the world, will see past that so easily? Will a teen watching this really get the sense that this is "really" about how depraved society can be, or "rising above oppression", or any of that? Or are they more likely, especially younger teens, to be scared and shocked by the violence they see, and believe, at least to a certain extent, that there must be some basis for this kind of violence in the real world?
And does the fact that there is basis for this in the real world mean that it should be used for entertainment purposes and to enrich movie-makers at the cost of suppressing the true indignities and butchery that goes on in the world and that does involve children, teens and young adults?
Shouldn't we require a different venue, a more controlled way of introducing such things to our youth, if we feel that they in fact be introduced? Should they be introduced to a 15 year old? A 14 year old? A 13 year old??
Either way, is this kind of "shock" a good thing for kids & teens? How are we not concerned that this will so wrongly plant concepts of violence in them, especially for teens who already use violence to deal with problems or emotions they can't control well - which we know sadly is a large percentage?
Furthermore, we know that kids & teens especially tend to mimic and idolize what they see, especially when it's in a "cool movie" , or comes from a "cool book" that "everybody" likes. Unfortunately we know that many of them just haven't developed the ability to distinguish between "fiction" and "reality" enough - certainly not to the point where there wouldn't be at least some negative effects from this kind of imagery.
And isn't the movie, by the fact it is a big "cool" Hollywood movie, implying "this violence is cool" or "it's cool to use weapons on each other" or "well killing is the only option if you have to survive" etc.?
Try to think about this for a second:
IF THE MOVIE MAKERS OR AUTHOR CARED MOST ABOUT WHAT THE SUPPOSED "MESSAGE" OF THE FILM WAS - I.E. TO BE CAREFUL OF HOW SOCIETY CAN DETERIORATE TO OPPRESSION ETC. - THEN WHY WOULD THEY NEED THE ADDED VIOLENCE, BLOOD & GORE IMAGES??
They could have easily show or depicted the death and drama indirectly, instead of visually showing it to the extent they did - just think of older Westerns or other "action movies" where people were shot and "killed" but without the added "shock value" of actually seeing all the blood and gore.
So clearly what they are really trying to do is shock the audience because that leaves more of an impression, regardless of whether it's a bad or damaging one, and that means better reviews, more of a following, and MORE $MONEY$.
Maybe what we should realize from all of this is that as long as we allow MONEY and GREED to rule our lives from politics to entertainment, we will continue to have major problems around the world that affect us all - which is ironically the only concept of the book that is worth understanding, but which is confused behind the unnecessary violence and gore which again wasn't really needed to get the point across, if it even does come across to the teens who are so shocked by what they see.
Maybe we should encourage all parents and young people to be honest and label these truly as attempts to create "hype", take advantage of teens and to make money for the movie studio (and the author by the way).