<doc.id=1081.a3>
<title> Are there different kinds of violence, and if yes, do they effect children differently? </title>
In the article it was mentioned that the V chip cannot sense the difference in violence between Schindler's list and Terminator Two, so I have decided to use those two motion pictures for simplicities sake. The two movies are totally different, both considering genre and the type of violence used. They are however two moneymaking Hollywood films. How do hey differ from each other considering violence and which kind is more dangerous to children. 

	 I am going to start by describing why I think that Schindler's list is the one most damaging to children. The form in which the film is presented has a tone of seriousness over it. It is above all presented in black-and-white, which gives it the air of a documentary, rather than the true picture of a well played Hollywood film. Schindler's list also has the background of a true story and the horrors of the Second World War. This affects the way it is viewed. Terminator two on the other hand is pure fiction. With its high technological special effects, that impressed the audience at the time of its release, it gives an impression that this cannot happen to me. There are not many, of us rational people, who would believe in a liquid man who comes with clever remarks while he is firing is Uzi at totally innocent people. It is well played but as a viewer you know it is pure fiction spun from the imagination of the scriptwriters. Children see things differently though; they sometimes have problems to se what is true and what is fantasy. For us Terminator two is film violence as entertainment (if you will excuse the word) but for children...
	 The violence is clearly different. And for me it is self evident that the Schindler's list kind is the most damaging for young people, if you were to compare the two. With its reality like footage and the backing of the truth it is scary. Therefore I judge it to be dangerous to children. The question, though, is if Schindler's list is really all that damaging to the children, it might give them nightmares but will they go out and gas their friends? Probably not. Isn't it more possible that they will go out and play Terminator? Shooting at each other with toy guns, like a modern "Cowboys and Indians" game. 
	 Considering children as viewers it is a known fact that they have a relatively short span of attention. Because of this they are not likely to choose a film like Schindler's list for their Friday night "home alone" fun, it happens to be over three hours long, much of which are long dialogs. No I think that they are more likely to choose more entertaining films, like Terminator two. So the exaggerated violence in Terminator two is actually more damaging because it is the kind that children are more likely to watch. 
	 There are of course other kinds of violent movies that children might watch, like martial arts films that has been very popular in Hollywood for some time. They have also been making films that has been clearly violent but by letting young actors have the leading role made them into childrens movies. Good examples of this are Sidekick (martial arts film) or the Home Alone movies where a young kid is left to fetch for himself while the two bad guys chase him. 

Well my conclusion is that violent films of all kinds are, to some degree, damaging for young people. Even though children are more likely to watch the Terminator two because it is more entertaining than the more documentary like Schindler's list. But I think that if they were to watch the two and compare they would say that Schindler's list is scarier while the entertainment in Terminator two damages them the most, because they do not see the violence as real.
</doc>