Monday

There is a deliberate non-use of guns in good films. I noticed this first in The Bourne Identity. Here, however, there is a reason: he doesn't want anything to do with violence, and is trying to repress his previous life as a killer. Although this is never stated, it is understood. Whereas, in Children of Men the main character avoids weaponry without reason - a gun would, in fact, help him out a lot, but he never even considers using one. James Bond does use them, but I would like to suggest sparingly. Obi Wan Kenobi famously disliked them. Indiana Jones has perhaps the best scene in cinema concerning guns, or not being able to use them. This last example indeed points to what I think is one of the main reasons for their non-use. For a script-writer a gun is a terrible thing. If a character has a gun he can end a confrontation quickly and easily. Thus in all situations script-writers attempt to get rid of guns - they accidentally slip out of a character's hands into a deep chasm etc - because they are not very good for the plot: confrontation is necessary to keep us involved. It's much more interesting, and affects the audience more profoundly, to have someone stabbed or strangled, or (best of all) to not kill them at all. A dead character is a dead end. Thus we must remember for movies the maxim: Guns don't kill people, script-writers do.