Violently attractive: Kick Ass 2 and Jim Carrey

I'm a film-maker and I love watching movies, I'm sure mostly everyone do. I love drama, romance, comedy, horror, suspense and action.

I recently watched a film called Kick Ass 2 it's a 2013 British-American superhero action-comedy film based on the comic book of the same name and Hit-Girl, both by Mark Millar and John Romita, Jr. It's about a guy named Dave Lizewski "Kick Ass" retired from fighting crimes, he begans training with his old friend Mindy Mcready to become a proper hero. Meanwhile they're enemy Chris D'Amico was plotting a revenge against Kick Ass. It was a good movie, a superhero who fights crime and saves the day, who doesn't right? One thing that worries me was the amount of violence in it, though people watching it in the cinema didn't mind, I thought Why are audiences attracted to bloodshed, gore and violence?

I came by an article entitled Jim Carrey condemns violence in his own movie Kick-Ass 2 by Ben Child from the Guardian.com, Jim Carrey, part from the cast, he plays the vigilante colonel stars and stripes, he said the he could no longer support the film  due to a shooting massacre at Connecticut's sandy hook elementary school after the film.  He wrote: "I did Kick-Ass 2 a month before Sandy Hook and now in all good conscience I cannot support that level of violence. My apologies to others involve[d] with the film. I am not ashamed of it but recent events have caused a change in my heart."
But still why are audiences attracted to bloodshed, gore and violence? I am curious about what is so compelling in watching violent movies like Kick Ass 2? and particularly to when it is to the extreme and involves an helpless victim dying or getting saved.

In one study made by Anne Bartsch of University of Augsburg, Germany and Louise Mares, University of Wisconsin-Madisonin, an article entitled What attracts people to violent movies? on sciencedaily.com , "It suggested that audiences are not necessarily attracted to violence per se, but seem to be drawn to violent content because they anticipate other benefits, such as thrill and suspense."

So we are not really attracted to violence but how the characters in the movie faces the violence we perceive it as a moving and meaningful acts of courage and motivation in the face of violence.

Anothe article about Violence questioning if leads to the real life situations, entitled Does Media Violence Lead to the Real Thing? by Vasilis K. Pozios, Praveen R. Kambam and H. Eric Bender for the site NYtimes.com. The articles question how violence can lead to the real thing that they have done a researches that can actually prove that it is true but some tends to differ. Exposure to violent imagery does not preordain violence, but it is a risk factor.  It is however in my opinion, true, It is a risk factor but that does not mean if you watched a lot of movies you will be a serial killer, that's like saying if I smoke cigarettes I would eventually have lung cancer.

Everyday, debates about media violence raises pertaining the balance between public safety and freedom of speech, even though it can cause real life situation, we, people should be the one willing to regulate this violent content .