Originally Posted by psycheoutsteve
For example, I think that if someone gets shot and there are people around to help, they will employ common sense and wait till the scene is safe while calling emergency services, but they will come to that person's aid when it is safe enough to do so. Most people will not ignore the situation like Brad Pitt's character.
Evidence would suggest that this is incorrect. We have a psychological tendency to ignore situations like this, especially when there are other people around. Numerous experiments have been conducted examining this bystander effect. The common real life example is the murder of Kitty Genovese. People in her apartment complex witnessed her get attacked over a period of 30 minutes and it took that amount of time for a person to pick up a phone and call the police from the comfort of their own apartment.
While I basically never agree with Armond White, I think his review of the film is pretty spot on (although I liked the movie a little more than he did). It's not like the film is a code to live by or anything, but it's bold, daring, and doesn't pull its punches. Something like The Ides of March felt like it was on the cusp of actually conveying its anger, but seemed to hold back a bit.
Like Dominik said, this is his pop song. It's not like it's going to change the country, but it gives Dominik an opportunity to express his anger via a gangster picture and will create discussion amongst those who have interest in doing so. If you didn't like the movie, that's cool, but I don't think it needs to cover the ground that you wanted it to cover. It's like saying that when Bob Dylan wrote Positively 4th Street, he should have also said that his hypocritical fans are probably still good people. The song is addressing hypocrisy, nothing more. If you want to look at the good that happens in America, there are other films that convey that.