Is anyone tired of celebrities taking up causes? I am. And I usually don't even give a shit about what celebrities do. But sometimes I see something like this commercial and am compelled to complain about it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctoZbeD-GlY
Many people are complaining that this ad is too violent and disturbing. But they are wrong for a couple of reasons. First, Kiera isn't actually being beaten up; she's dramatizing being beaten up. Second, Kiera is not actually beaten up enough. What does it matter that she's not actually being beaten up? Because tons of women across the world actually are every day and she is not one of them. Why does it matter that she is not being beaten up enough? Because she's Kiera Knightley who is annoying and if I have to settle just for dramatized violence against her, at least show more of it.
Why am I not just happy she's championing the prevention of domestic violence? Because like most celebrities who take up such causes, I feel she'd be a better champion against domestic violence if she just donated a shitload of money to an abuse women's shelter rather than make a two minute ad where for the first minute she drives around in a Mini Coop, looks at herself in reflective surfaces, and walks around all careless and nonchalant way, only to have the second half of the ad show a bizarre scene where some random faceless guy beats her up. What does this do for abused women?
Sure, there is the text at the end of the ad for the women's aid website. But why a two minute ad just to show that at the end? I am also not saying that a celebrity has to have entirely altruistic motives for doing an ad like this. Even if they want to do it creating controversy, enhancing their fame, or boosting their careers, I guess more power to them. But for her to depict herself as a women actually being abused is offensive to me. Not because the ad was too violent, because it was actually not violent enough. But because I feel that once her day's work is over, and she's made her stupid little anti-abuse commercial, that with all her fame and wealth she could give a shit about abused women worldwide. Sure, she may care about it in the back of her mind, and sure, it's not like I'm doing anything to stop domestic abuse, but neither is a stupid fucking ad like this and ultimately neither is Kiera Knightley.
And this is a bit off topic, but how come so many celebrities who vouch for humane causes so often wear huge fuck off diamonds? Diamonds that are often mined using slave labor in the vicinity of sex slave camps, guarded by child soldiers who are abducted from their families and forced into a life of violence?
I'm not sure what donating money would do to help the problem.
Donating money would do nothing to prevent domestic abuse. It could just help women who are in abusive situations. And don't take too seriously my suggestion that she donate money. I just think it would be a better use of her assets than her lame acting.
The real reason for ads like this is to bring awareness to it. So, having famous people in it, being somewhat controversial, or graphic, makes them more effective. Because, people will then talk about it, post links to it in forums and help rack up a million Utube hits which could ultimately lead to more donations than even Keira Knightly could provide on her own. It's done ia lot in commercials and even movies, because it's effective. If it didn't work no one would bother.
Take for example the movie blood diamond. Based on your response above it's most likely the sole source of your informatiion on diamond mining, and a cause championed by Leonardo DiCaprio.
All that being said I would rather have these filthy rich celebrities try to do some good with their fame and fortune, rather than just spend it on themselves, even if it is a minor cause or not completely selfless.
The real reason for ads like this is to bring awareness to it. So, having famous people in it, being somewhat controversial, or graphic, makes them more effective. Because, people will then talk about it, post links to it in forums and help rack up a million Utube hits which could ultimately lead to more donations than even Keira Knightly could provide on her own. It's done ia lot in commercials and even movies, because it's effective. If it didn't work no one would bother.
I'm sure it's arguable the effectiveness of such ads. I don't think awareness helps solve things to the extent that others do. People seem more aware than ever these days of child molestation, but I seriously doubt such awareness is actually deterring any predators from committing the act.
Quote from "Asynchronic" »
Take for example the movie blood diamond. Based on your response above it's most likely the sole source of your informatiion on diamond mining, and a cause championed by Leonardo DiCaprio.
I wrote a lengthy research paper about blood diamonds long before that movie was made. I didn't need Hollywood to enlighten me about the issue.
Quote from "Asynchronic" »
All that being said I would rather have these filthy rich celebrities try to do some good with their fame and fortune, rather than just spend it on themselves, even if it is a minor cause or not completely selfless.
I wouldn't. I'd rather them use their fame and fortune only for themselves and stop claiming to be so caring about the world. But then again my perspective on things has always been a bit deranged.
Well... Such commercials do make me really mad, but not because of Kiera Knightley but because of the idiots who would actually care about it just because a commercial says they should. But then, basically almost every commercial is like that and basically almost every commercial has me going "wtf? How should that make me want to buy their product?".
Actually, it's not about caring about because you've seen the commercial. It's about caring about it because the commercial made you aware. Most people are not confronted with domestic violence every day. People lead busy lives, and such important topics such as sexual slavery, domestic violence, and the cure for cancer are not always the first things they think of.
Commercials like these are necessary, because it forces people to stop their busy lives for just a moment, and make a difference in somebody's life.
What's interesting about the comments I'm reading is that you're calling out people who don't make a difference, but have you?
I personally dont think shes that hot >.> but, however domestic abuse starts with the parents, like most problems in the US the problem started with the parents. If we just had kept our morals, less people would end as messed up as criminals. Purely because if we went back to our old ideals (excluding racism obviously) then it wouldn't be socialiably exceptable to do that (domestic violence).
I personally dont think shes that hot >.> but, however domestic abuse starts with the parents, like most problems in the US the problem started with the parents. If we just had kept our morals, less people would end as messed up as criminals. Purely because if we went back to our old ideals (excluding racism obviously) then it wouldn't be socialiably exceptable to do that (domestic violence).
It's not really her body, but her face. She's just a pretty person.
No amount of money or adverts will sort this problem out. If they wanted to sort this problem they need to start locking people away for proper amounts of time, none of this slap on the wrist shit. Same thing goes with lots of problems in society. Sadly, criminals rights > victims rights
And if they're going to make an advert about it, they should of used a nameless actor. I think that would have more of an effect anyway, because with Kiera Knightley, all 50% of the audience is thinking is... "id tap that".
but, however domestic abuse starts with the parents, like most problems in the US the problem started with the parents. If we just had kept our morals, less people would end as messed up as criminals.
Parents are certainly the problem but since parents are product of their own parents and on we are not going to change the parents here. Which means society needs to stop fooling around and being stupid and start telling kids what exists out there. From my observation, neither schools nor youth organizations nor military orgs (ROTC) are doing any of that. In fact, most organizations propogate "listen to your parents". If they teach morals, they teach them stupidly aka "don't do because we said so" which works only short term. They generealize on the parents' quality and most parents are bad or mediocre at best.
Quote from "edi-lupus" »
Purely because if we went back to our old ideals (excluding racism obviously) then it wouldn't be socialiably exceptable to do that (domestic violence).
*looks back to the old ideas, Salem witch trials come to mind* Uhh, no thanks. We need new ideals. Or, rather, absence of thereof. Ideas are dogmatic, hence illogical, and will not be followed.
*looks back to the old ideas, Salem witch trials come to mind*
I don't think he meant that far back... I think he was referring to the first half of the 20th century. I'm going to guess that domestic violence was at an all time low then... Maybe it takes two World Wars and a major depression for people to stop being such assholes to their families... hmm
I honestly consider any celebrity hand out a fucking joke. If a person wants to truly help someone, he would do so without expecting anything in return, ESPECIALLY publicity about what he has done. Sure, help an AIDS center, just don't fill the magazines up with news about it.
Chances are, that anyone with television to view such an ad already knows about the problem. No one needs an ad to encourage him to commit a humane action. All that these ads do is boost the actress' fame, and give her more money to spend on her mink coat. Even if she's doing it for free, she's still doing it for a selfish cause, even if subconsciously so.
Domestic violence is encouraged by a lot of Hollywood movies, or Hollywood encouraged ideals. So instead of getting Hollywood actors to act out such idiotic ads and donate 0.1% of their stupendous wealth, get them to not act in such idiotic movies to begin with.
I honestly consider any celebrity hand out a fucking joke. If a person wants to truly help someone, he would do so without expecting anything in return, ESPECIALLY publicity about what he has done. Sure, help an AIDS center, just don't fill the magazines up with news about it.
Chances are, that anyone with television to view such an ad already knows about the problem. No one needs an ad to encourage him to commit a humane action. All that these ads do is boost the actress' fame, and give her more money to spend on her mink coat. Even if she's doing it for free, she's still doing it for a selfish cause, even if subconsciously so.
Domestic violence is encouraged by a lot of Hollywood movies, or Hollywood encouraged ideals. So instead of getting Hollywood actors to act out such idiotic ads and donate 0.1% of their stupendous wealth, get them to not act in such idiotic movies to begin with.
If I am reading you right you must think all celebrities are a joke. All celebrities give their hand-outs. It may not always be about the publicity but for those that aren't doing it for the publicity they are likely doing it for the tax break much like any other rich person (refering to USA anyway).
I'm not entirely sure what you're getting at. You wanted me to delete your post so I did
Unless you want me to un-delete your post, but then I would probably have to mod it in some other way
As for your first post, it was not me who deleted it
No amount of money or adverts will sort this problem out. If they wanted to sort this problem they need to start locking people away for proper amounts of time, none of this slap on the wrist shit. Same thing goes with lots of problems in society. Sadly, criminals rights > victims rights
And if they're going to make an advert about it, they should of used a nameless actor. I think that would have more of an effect anyway, because with Kiera Knightley, all 50% of the audience is thinking is... "id tap that".
Means of prevention that are harsh are all well and good, but I think the purpose is to create awareness. Many women believe that this sort of thing will never happen to them which makes them more susceptible.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
~Nocturne, previously known as Eve
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctoZbeD-GlY
Many people are complaining that this ad is too violent and disturbing. But they are wrong for a couple of reasons. First, Kiera isn't actually being beaten up; she's dramatizing being beaten up. Second, Kiera is not actually beaten up enough. What does it matter that she's not actually being beaten up? Because tons of women across the world actually are every day and she is not one of them. Why does it matter that she is not being beaten up enough? Because she's Kiera Knightley who is annoying and if I have to settle just for dramatized violence against her, at least show more of it.
Why am I not just happy she's championing the prevention of domestic violence? Because like most celebrities who take up such causes, I feel she'd be a better champion against domestic violence if she just donated a shitload of money to an abuse women's shelter rather than make a two minute ad where for the first minute she drives around in a Mini Coop, looks at herself in reflective surfaces, and walks around all careless and nonchalant way, only to have the second half of the ad show a bizarre scene where some random faceless guy beats her up. What does this do for abused women?
Sure, there is the text at the end of the ad for the women's aid website. But why a two minute ad just to show that at the end? I am also not saying that a celebrity has to have entirely altruistic motives for doing an ad like this. Even if they want to do it creating controversy, enhancing their fame, or boosting their careers, I guess more power to them. But for her to depict herself as a women actually being abused is offensive to me. Not because the ad was too violent, because it was actually not violent enough. But because I feel that once her day's work is over, and she's made her stupid little anti-abuse commercial, that with all her fame and wealth she could give a shit about abused women worldwide. Sure, she may care about it in the back of her mind, and sure, it's not like I'm doing anything to stop domestic abuse, but neither is a stupid fucking ad like this and ultimately neither is Kiera Knightley.
And this is a bit off topic, but how come so many celebrities who vouch for humane causes so often wear huge fuck off diamonds? Diamonds that are often mined using slave labor in the vicinity of sex slave camps, guarded by child soldiers who are abducted from their families and forced into a life of violence?
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
I'm not sure what donating money would do to help the problem.
CyberPunk RP Nexus
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Take for example the movie blood diamond. Based on your response above it's most likely the sole source of your informatiion on diamond mining, and a cause championed by Leonardo DiCaprio.
All that being said I would rather have these filthy rich celebrities try to do some good with their fame and fortune, rather than just spend it on themselves, even if it is a minor cause or not completely selfless.
I wrote a lengthy research paper about blood diamonds long before that movie was made. I didn't need Hollywood to enlighten me about the issue.
I wouldn't. I'd rather them use their fame and fortune only for themselves and stop claiming to be so caring about the world. But then again my perspective on things has always been a bit deranged.
Siaynoq's Playthroughs
Actually, it's not about caring about because you've seen the commercial. It's about caring about it because the commercial made you aware. Most people are not confronted with domestic violence every day. People lead busy lives, and such important topics such as sexual slavery, domestic violence, and the cure for cancer are not always the first things they think of.
Commercials like these are necessary, because it forces people to stop their busy lives for just a moment, and make a difference in somebody's life.
What's interesting about the comments I'm reading is that you're calling out people who don't make a difference, but have you?
It's not really her body, but her face. She's just a pretty person.
Well, just watch Pirates.
CyberPunk RP Nexus
And if they're going to make an advert about it, they should of used a nameless actor. I think that would have more of an effect anyway, because with Kiera Knightley, all 50% of the audience is thinking is... "id tap that".
*looks back to the old ideas, Salem witch trials come to mind* Uhh, no thanks. We need new ideals. Or, rather, absence of thereof. Ideas are dogmatic, hence illogical, and will not be followed.
LINK
Bleh...
Chances are, that anyone with television to view such an ad already knows about the problem. No one needs an ad to encourage him to commit a humane action. All that these ads do is boost the actress' fame, and give her more money to spend on her mink coat. Even if she's doing it for free, she's still doing it for a selfish cause, even if subconsciously so.
Domestic violence is encouraged by a lot of Hollywood movies, or Hollywood encouraged ideals. So instead of getting Hollywood actors to act out such idiotic ads and donate 0.1% of their stupendous wealth, get them to not act in such idiotic movies to begin with.
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
If I am reading you right you must think all celebrities are a joke. All celebrities give their hand-outs. It may not always be about the publicity but for those that aren't doing it for the publicity they are likely doing it for the tax break much like any other rich person (refering to USA anyway).
Unless you want me to un-delete your post, but then I would probably have to mod it in some other way
As for your first post, it was not me who deleted it
Rise and rise again, until lambs become lions
Means of prevention that are harsh are all well and good, but I think the purpose is to create awareness. Many women believe that this sort of thing will never happen to them which makes them more susceptible.