'The Hunt's' theatrical release is suspended

Why Universal's forced suspension of 'The Hunt' from theatrical release spells trouble for every Hollywood film regardless of entertainment value or political subtext

Betty Gilpin in 'The Hunt' (CREDIT: Universal/Blumhouse)

by Jack Linsdell

Yesterday, we all got news courtesy of every newspaper outlet that after allegedly being singled out by President Trump for it's promotion of gun violence to the American public, Universal had been forced to suspend The Hunt indefinitely from theatrical release. 

After a terrible couple of weeks of yet more tragic mass shootings in America, specifically Dayton and El Paso, President Trump called out the film (although not naming it specifically) as being the "problem" as to why Americans continue waking up to headlines of yet more mass shootings. Regardless of your views about Trump and American society (let me say this; if Trump didn't promote racism and bigotry in his acts as President and set a good example by acting like a human being and restricting the availability of guns these events would be much rarer), the argument that movies can have a significant influence on the public by "persuading" them into crime/mass shootings is a complex and mostly null-void one. 

The Hunt was/is a Blumhouse horror-thriller flick, starring Betty Gilpin (Netflix's GLOW series) that charts 12 innocent white Americans who find out they are being hunted in a game constructed for/by rich elites and fight for their lives. After it's marketing was pulled from the TV due to sensitivity regarding the recent shootings (a smart and perfectly sensible decision), Universal has been forced to suspend the film indefinitely from release (an irrational but financially secure decision) because of it's gun violence. Now, all due respect, but the film was meant for release on September 27th, and considering today is only the 11th August, I do have to question if sensitivity still becomes a priority over a month later. If so, then how long do we deem "enough time passed"? Furthermore, I cannot see how The Hunt is any different to many films coming in and out of cinemas on a week-by-week basis, to the point that it warrants suspension from release. I fully understand and support sensitivity issues, and if it was coming out this week, then yes, I would fully agree with a suspension. However, how is this any different to The Hunger Games, John Wick - Chapter 3: Parabellum, The Purge or Avengers Endgame? 

Most films, whether they be in the horror, thriller or superhero genre have action scenes/violence in them. Heck, even rom-com's and period drama's contain violent scenes. Although, Avengers Endgame or Man of Steel are big, blockbuster superhero movies, they contain whole blocks and cities being destroyed (killing many thousands/millions) with little/no consideration or coverage to the effects these actions have on the people. Are we saying that a low budget survival-thriller with a similar (I'd imagine) level of violence to any John Wick, Deadpool or The Equalizer movie is worthy of censorship, whilst the biggest movies in town with (arguably) more widescale carnage and destruction should be allowed to play to the masses? The truth is that I can't see how The Hunt is any different or that much of an outrageous depiction of violence compared to countless other movies that it warrants suspending it's release. Chloe Grace Moretz commented when Kick Ass 2 faced outrage over it's violence that she knows it's a movie and just because someone has used a gun in a film doesn't inspire/encourage her to pick up one herself. And, she couldn't be more right. 

I can understand how video games could be considered to be worsening the problem of gun crime and mass shootings in America because your literally playing the game and killing people (in the game) with your actions. And, with the VR experience, this feeling of virtual killing can become a problem, especially for excessive gamers. But, we all watch a film for entertainment. I don't know any person who goes into a movie to be inspired to become a pirate after watching Captain Phillips for example. And, hey, even if someone was inspired to take up arms after watching a film, if guns were less accessible in society, they'd have nothing to act on anyway.

So, to have the President of America force Universal to suspend the release of a movie all involved have countlessly worked hard on, and many paying consumers would've been excited to see is outrageous and so hypocritical considering his own actions/lack of actions are creating the problem in the first place. If I had made a film and it got suspended for showing someone running around with a gun killing people, but then James Bond can do it in Bond 25 in April 2020 to huge financial success then I'd be annoyed. Okay, films with excessive and/or unnecessary levels of gory violence (see any Taratino flick or Netflix's Polar movie) should face restrictions as I'm sure many don't find entertainment from needless violence. So, that could be a form of censorship that might help solving America's gun epidemic. However, what The Hunt has proven, is that no movie is ever safe from government censorship and that these perfectly fine movies (with content matching those that have come out in the last 50 years of cinema) can be used as a scapegoat for the government's own shortcomings. 

The Hunt was made for $18 million, meaning even a domestic total of $15 million and a worldwide one of $30 million would still have made a profit for all involved, and considering this one was coming from a very popular production company for horror/thrillers (Get Out, Insidious, Halloween) that appeal and hit big with mass audiences, it's commercial prospects were even better. 

So, the conversation about films and the content they depict will be ongoing, but the argument that they are single-handily responsible for mass shootings, is damn right wrong. These incidents are tragic, horrifying and incredibly reckless, and for all victims caught up in them, you have my sincere condolences and I cannot begin to imagine how much grief you are in. However, I do believe that problems revolving around government policy and the way the man inside the Whitehouse conducts himself in front of the world's eyes have to be considered more important "causes" of this cruel epidemic than movies with some violence in them, which have been around (and are enjoyed by the masses) for decades.