Reading this site is not as fun as reading qt3, but it will do for now.

http://downforeveryoneorjustme.com/quartertothree.com

A) That site is awesome.

B) Apparently there's a way to get to it. Look in the Patapon post. It involves cutting open live doves and consulting their still-living organs for tech support.

Erm just a thought but these children don't look 'mature' or 'teenage' to me - why allow them the oppurtunity to play videogames that are outside their age group?

What game is being played by that young boy who has a tear drop off his face? Is he really that moved? Or just dry-eyed from staring so long?

That's hardly a cinéma vérité look and kids and video games. He's definitely out to push some buttons, but I am a bit surprised at workout they give their mouths while playing. I think there was any coaching, make up, and some hair styling used for some or all of those shots.

I thought that was a girl Doh, and yea it was weird. You can tell some of those kids are going to grow up (or are) the little s**** who are found in Halo and such.

@Chijts, do you mean the video artist? I don't know if it's a guy or a girl; I just defaulted to 'he' because I'm a sexist pig.

Robbie Cooper obviously has a very strong opinion on the effects of video games on children, and his video rams his message down the throat of the viewer. Art can be subtle, subversive, ambiguous. Cooper's video is over produced, heavy handed and obvious. A slickly produced political statement, which in itself is not wrong, but it hardly qualifies as "art". Grow up Robbie Cooper.

"One of the many reasons videogames aren't good as spectator sports"

I like video games MORE THAN spectator sports, I guess I'm wrong, then?

Easter, whether you consider it art or not, it's still compelling. Imagine the video put up in detail on a wall sized screen. You get such an intimate look at the act of expressing. You can see a larger version of the video at the artists website: http://www.robbiecooper.org/

This artist also did the book of photographs based on virtual identities called Alter Egos. It did the blog rounds awhile ago, but some are there with full text as well.

I think somedude put it really well in the post above mine: "act of expressing", indeed. And even the act of being expressionless, in a few instances! Cooper's opinion of games isn't very much in evidence. Instead, he seems interested in the these kids' faces, and I think it's a beautiful bit of work. You could get the same result from having kids doing other activities, but it's much easier to train a camera on them when they're glued to a screen. :)

None of the children in the Robbie Cooper video look like they are 17, so why are they allowed to play M rated games that are intended for players 17 and up? I am an adult and I like playing mature games, but it sickens me to see the same media that decries the effects of violent video games on children exposing children to violent video games that are clearly labeled inappropriate for children. Would they let those same children watch NC-17 rated films for a photoshoot?

Mr. Anderton, there is no reason a child under 17 shouldn't be allowed to play an M-rated game if that child's parent consents. The ESRB ratings are there for parental guidelines, not hard and fast rules. And since I suspect Mr. Cooper got the children's parents to sign waivers for their participation in the video, I also suspect the waivers made it clear the kids could be playing M-rated games.

For all the talk about the ESRB and parental responsibility, it's important to remember that the final call rests with the parents. That's actually the whole point of the debate, isn't it?

Hey, Keith, I think you need to reread that sentence. You're adding an as. He's not saying that video games aren't as good as spectator sports. He's saying they aren't good as spectator sports. Which ain't wrong.

@Somedude, sorry you got your post in before mine, I was replying to the person called "Doh" not just saying Doh. Doh!

@Bahimiron, I actually quite enjoy watching people play games (although I tend to annoy them by telling them what to do), but not their faces when they play them. That would be rather creepy.

creepy like that blond girl.

Tom, lines like "come back here and let me stab you" sound totally innocent to anyone familiar with games, but to non-gamers, that'll set off alarm bells (especially in the era of school massacres). There's several moments chosen just for their salaciousness. If you watch it again, look at the kid's eyes when the GTA4 radio fortune teller vo thoroughly describes a gay french kiss. Or there's the kid that actually sheds a tear ( which could have been watery eyes). That's one child I'd actually like to know more about to understand the reaction better. Even the completely vacant blonde haired girl's shots were manipulated because it cuts just as she starts to bop to the russian pop song.

Technically they were all manipulated, which you can't really get around when doing this sort of thing, but I'm surprised you seemed so tone deaf to the choices. Perhaps it was just the salacious moments were the most interesting, which is entirely possible. Either way, it's still very interesting.

"Tone deaf to the choices"? That's pretty unfair.

You've singled out three instances that *might* be construed as critical of gaming. You've conveniently ignored the instances of delight and glee. And you're accusing me of being "tone deaf to the choices"? Because, yes, there are choices, but they don't express any single opinion of videogaming. It seems to me Cooper's more interested in the expressions on the children's faces than making a statement on videogaming. As Easter put it, "ramming a message down our throats". Because unless that message is that children react in a variety of ways to videogames, I don't see any single message or opinion.

I don't think you're giving enough weight to the soundscape with which that delight and glee is juxtaposed: violence. GTA4's radio sequence is the main exception. It's not like we're watching these kids play Animal Crossing. Look, I have no idea if the artist intends to be critical of gaming and I certainly don't think he or she is ramming anything down our throats. However, I think it is clear the artist intends to be provocative.

It is interesting to watch the ways kids innocently approach these games (particularly because they are violent), but I don't see how you can realistically say the same thing about the filmmaker and this project.

But really, I didn't mean to be unfair or offend and the last thing I want is to get in a war of words with you. I know I'll be thoroughly trounced. :)

I certainly don't deny the artist is trying to be provocative. Heck, here we are, provoked! But it seemed you were implying Cooper was critical of videogaming and accusing me of being tone-deaf for disagreeing with that. I have no idea what Cooper's perspective is on videogames. That they make kids smile? Cry? Want to stab other kids? It's not so clear cut as Easter said and you implied. Cooper is by no means "innocent" or "objective", but neither is he "heavy-handed" (Easter's claim).

I do confess that the juxtaposition of violent sounds and grinning kids doesn't have the much effect on me. As someone who plays a lot of games, I sort of live that every day. :) And I guess it's very different from similar imagery when people are watching movies or TV. There are sounds of violence and screaming and chainsaws, yet people sit and placidly watch (I'm talking, of course, about the audience for When Harry Met Sally). It's a bit different in a videogame when we're engaged with those sounds. Which is part of the point of Cooper's video.

Anyway, good points. I was mainly bristling at being called "tone deaf", which I like to think is only true when I'm singing in Rock Band.

No worries. I went a bit too far and chose some pretty prickly language to express myself. We may get to see the difference between mediums because Cooper has plans to explore different media and age groups, though we'll see if that plays out.