Don't take aim at Jim Carrey

People shouldn’t be attacking Jim Carrey based on his political stance on “Kick-Ass 2.” We should be asking questions we can reasonably influence.

 

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.

 

 

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”

I Love You Phillip Morris

Jim Carrey and Ewan McGregor give some of the best performances of their career in this farcical biography.

Some Hollywood love stories just seem too good to be true. “I Love You Phillip Morris” seems way too good to be true, and yet somehow it is, but hardly in the cliché way one might expect from, well, Hollywood.

Steven Russell (Jim Carrey) is a man devoid of any identity but a pro at performing the expectations of society whenever the mood strikes him. As a child, he was adopted and became an upstanding poster boy. As an adult, Steven’s a cop and a model citizen living the American dream with a wife and kids. Following a car accident, he reveals he’s gay, but more accurately, flamboyantly gay, going as far as committing credit fraud to live a perfect life of fashionable luxury. And in prison, Steven’s the perfect cellmate laying down the rules of the yard and encouraging the sexual favors.

Yet with no personality to fall back on, Steven’s cheerful demeanor and everything that comes out of it is a lie. He means no ill will, so it’s impossible to dislike him, but if you’re going to be a fraud, why not be a fraud in the biggest way possible? Continue reading “I Love You Phillip Morris”

Rapid Response: The Truman Show

“The Truman Show” doesn’t seem to really be about the philosophical ideas of fate vs. choice or the conflicting concepts of reality vs. artificiality. It’s also a weak jab at Hollywood and reality TV obsessions and becomes almost exclusively about itself, an elaborate exploration of its “what if” scenario.

I watched the critically acclaimed cult film for the first time last night, despite how often it’s on TBS, and found it to be somewhat overrated. It was cute in its tongue-in-cheek, sitcom-y sort of way that included product placement and continuity sight gags, but all the questions that it left me with were more problematic than they were intriguing. Continue reading “Rapid Response: The Truman Show”