James Cameron Virtue Signals About Guns in Avatar 2

Hollywood director James Cameron, who made his career in large point by using guns in movies, is now virtue signaling about guns in movies.

A prominent figure in the entertainment industry is politically inconsistent? Who knew?

READ: CHELSEA HANDLER SUPPORTS CANCEL CULTURE, SAYS ‘REPUBLICANS’ ARE GREATEST THREAT TO WOMEN

Variety covered Cameron’s new found stance on gun violence in films, explained during a promotional interview.

While talking about his latest project, Avatar: The Way of Water, he said he made cuts to avoid showing guns.

“Cameron revealed the film would’ve run 10 minutes longer had he not cut out scenes with gun violence. The filmmaker said he is no longer interested in fetishizing guns in his action scenes given the rampant gun violence in the U.S.”

He also claimed he wanted to “find a balance” by removing certain scenes.

“I actually cut about 10 minutes of the movie targeting gunplay action,” Cameron said. “I wanted to get rid of some of the ugliness, to find a balance between light and dark. You have to have conflict, of course. Violence and action are the same thing, depending on how you look at it. This is the dilemma of every action filmmaker, and I’m known as an action filmmaker,” he concluded.

James Cameron Criticizes His Own History

To his credit, Cameron acknowledged that he did use guns to advance his career, especially with the Terminator series.

But naturally, that turned into an opportunity to virtue signal about ”gun violence,” according to Variety.

“I look back on some films that I’ve made, and I don’t know if I would want to make that film now. I don’t know if I would want to fetishize the gun, like I did on a couple of ‘Terminator’ movies 30-plus years ago, in our current world. What’s happening with guns in our society turns my stomach,” Cameron said.

The mistake that he, and many others make, is conflating guns with criminals. The overwhelming majority of lawful gun owners use them their entire lives without incident. But criminals intent on causing violence would use whatever means necessary, regardless of whether guns are shown on screen.

Cameron’s implication is that by supposedly fetishizing guns, he influenced a generation of criminals to commit acts of violence.

Obviously that’s not what he meant to say, but it highlights the absurdity of removing scenes because they contain guns.

Not to mention that for years, those on the left maintained that entertainment had little influence on societal behavior or cultural norms.

Now, apparently, Cameron believes that movies like his could contribute to gun problems.

Which is it?

But then again, his liberal bonafides might be up for debate anyway, considering he makes movies glorifying ”cultural appropriation.”

Maybe sit these next couple plays out, James.