Rated R

[mfbukowski]

My mom was pretty forthcoming about her experiences in WW2. My dad was much more tight lipped. i wish he'd have told us more about them.

Totally different. My now best friend and I would probably have tried to kill each other in the '60's - I was a hippie draft dodger. He was a "baby killer fighting for the military industrial complex and corporate Amerika" to me then.

Viet Nam was VERY different than any war before or since- and it is kind of appropriate that it has come up here.

My opinions of that war haven't changed- now that to me was "blind obedience" and is still an example of a case in which I would NOT obey anyone to fight in that war, not even the prophet.

I would have died willingly in WWII if necessary.

But watching R rated movies? It's nothing to lose your integrity over. If you have covenanted to obey the church/prophet, and it isn't a big deal, why disobey? For me, my integrity is on the line- THAT is the issue.

[Skylla]

It isn't the same thing as being there and the hollywood producers have advisors who were actually there, not some joker who thinks he knows what it was like because his brother was there.

Stop the insults.

Skylla

[thesometimesaint]

mfbukowski:

War to the individual troops in battle it is pretty much the same. Whether it is the Battle of the Buldge. Pork Chop Hill or Hamburger Hill. Vietnam was different only in that it was unpopular, and ultimately unwinnable by military force. We elected a President with a secret plan to get us out of Vietnam not to prolong our stay.

[mfbukowski]

mfbukowski:

War to the individual troops in battle it is pretty much the same. Whether it is the Battle of the Buldge. Pork Chop Hill or Hamburger Hill. Vietnam was different only in that it was unpopular, and ultimately unwinnable by military force. We elected a President with a secret plan to get us out of Vietnam not to prolong our stay.

"Only different in that..." That is the whole problem!

The guys over there knew that had little support at home. They were smoking dope and listening to Jimmy Hendrix. Would you rather fight for a cause you knew in your bones was right, true and moral or one that nobody quite understood and many at home were opposed to?

Why would you fight at all for a cause you or no one else believed in? Would you get shot at for such a cause? Would your attitude be different?

And bringing it back to the OP- would you be "obedient" to your leaders under these conditions?

And what young people don't understand is that you could be plucked off your comfortable campus, and sent to die in a war no one (in your perception) was in favor of. Your alternative was leaving the country or jail.

Would you perform you duty better or worse under these conditions, than you would, fighting for a cause you were there to fight for because you believed in it, with full support from your nation and peers?

I think the difference is pretty clear.

Edited November 29, 2011 by mfbukowski

[cinepro]

I do selectively watch R movies. For example, I don't understand how Gladiator gets an R while LOTR gets a PG-13. However, the counsel to not watch R-rated movies is official doctrine:

...and is a good rule of thumb imho.

Well, technically it would be doctrine for the "Young Men" to not watch R-rated movies.

The reason I don't believe it is doctrinal (or a "commandment") is that it just isn't practical for God to give direction to his worldwide Church using a very specific regional standard. But it is practical for a person expressing their own personal opinion to use the cultural standard with which they are familiar.

It would be like joining a Church that had its headquarters in Belgium and being told that God doesn't want you to watch any movies that are rated "KNT/ENA". Such guidance might make sense to people living in Belgium, but it's just not useful outside of Belgium (see post #5)..

It's like my wife's Canadian roommates at Rick's who would watch movies that my wife knew were rated R, but they didn't have a problem with them because "they weren't Rated R* in Canada!"

*Some of my favorite movies that were Rated R in the USA, but were rated "14A" in Canada, which is closer to the US PG-13:

The Godfather

The Matrix

The Usual Suspects

Memento

Saving Private Ryan

Amelie

Alien

Aliens

Gladiator

Slumdog Millionaire

Let the Right One In

In Bruges

The Fall

Apocalypto

Adaptation

Goodbye Lenin!

Road to Perdition

Garden State

Kung Fu Hustle

...and not "R" in the US, but "New York Doll" is on that list as well!

Edited November 29, 2011 by cinepro

[mfbukowski]

It would be like joining a Church that had its headquarters in Belgium and being told that God doesn't want you to watch any movies that are rated "KNT/ENA". Such guidance might make sense to people living in Belgium, but it's just not useful outside of Belgium (see post #5)..

So you're saying that people in Belgium then, should not obey that commandment directed specifically to them. Is that what you're saying?

[thesometimesaint]

I volunteered rather than waiting for the Draft. I'm no hero I flew a typewriter in California for virtually my entire tour of duty. Would have I served in Vietnam if asked? I put yes on the paperwork necessary to go. But President Nixon ended sending new troops to Vietnam just days before I was to get on the plane.

[mfbukowski]

I volunteered rather than waiting for the Draft. I'm no hero I flew a typewriter in California for virtually my entire tour of duty. Would have I served in Vietnam if asked? I put yes on the paperwork necessary to go. But President Nixon ended sending new troops to Vietnam just days before I was to get on the plane.

Good for you! Then it was different for you, as it was for my now-best friend. You followed the path of obedience because you believed in the cause, and I did not.

I guess what we are trying to get at, is when it is "ok" to disobey- what kinds of issues constitute a just cause to disobey a law or commandment and what causes do not constitute a just cause.

Back to the OP- to me, my desire to see a movie R rated is not sufficient cause for me to disobey the prophet, but getting my head blown off because I got drafted into what I considered a ridiculous war was a sufficient cause to disobey my government.

(As it turned out, after my Army physical, I was 1-Y which meant medically disqualified, so I never actually had to break the law, but would have if necessary)

[cinepro]

So you're saying that people in Belgium then, should not obey that commandment directed specifically to them. Is that what you're saying?

I would hope that the people in Belgium would at least be as perceptive as everyone else in the world to see that the instruction was probably fallible in its specificity.

I should be clear that I'm not saying we shouldn't be discriminating in what we watch, read or listen to. I am pretty careful about what I allow my children to watch, and I've had a ClearPlay DVD player for 7+ years. And there are many, many movies I choose not to see because of their content.

I only reject the notion that the MPAA rating of a movie is a good absolute indicator on whether something is not worth watching. But I certainly don't begrudge those who choose not to watch any Rated R (or, for some families, PG-13) films, for whatever reason.

I myself don't buy music with the Parental Advisory on it because I tend to be really bothered by profanity in music, and I don't care to spend the time researching the nature of the advisory. So I understand the idea. It's just too bad our Church leaders used the MPAA rating as shorthand when expressing their personal opinions on the subject, which has led some LDS to just take the whole thing a little to far.

Edited November 29, 2011 by cinepro

[Mola Ram Suda Ram]

It's just too bad our Church leaders used the MPAA rating as shorthand when expressing their personal opinions on the subject, which has led some LDS to just take the whole thing a little to far.

Interesting. I agree with you here.

So have you made any R rated movies?

[mfbukowski]

Edit: this first quote and reply:

I would hope that the people in Belgium would at least be as perceptive as everyone else in the world to see that the instruction was probably fallible in its specificity.

"Fallible in its specificity" is a phrase I don't think I have ever heard before. So only Stake Presidents and Area Authorities can give specific instructions for local areas, and NOT General Authorities? I don't think this idea will hold up

I only reject the notion that the MPAA rating of a movie is a good absolute indicator on whether something is not worth watching.

I don't think we are discussing that. I see the issue as one of obedience or non-obedience.

It's just too bad our Church leaders used the MPAA rating as shorthand when expressing their personal opinions on the subject, which has led some LDS to just take the whole thing a little to far.

Any "shorthand" classification is going to be imperfect, but I think it is good that there are guidelines in this area.

And again, to me, the issue of obedience fills in the areas where I might disagree about a movie's rating. I think it is a small sacrifice to make to allow me to experience obedience for its own sake, just as I do with the word of wisdom. I really see no difference between this and an occasional glass of wine, which most members would see as clearly violating a commandment.

Edited November 29, 2011 by mfbukowski

[Nominee]

It's just too bad our Church leaders used the MPAA rating as shorthand when expressing their personal opinions on the subject

I don't think they did just use the MPAA rating as shorthand when expressing what wisdom and advice the Lord offers to us out of mercy.

I think we all know full well and it has been shown even in this thread in what many other words this same advice and wisdom has been shared with us.

It isn't just the rating given by the MPAA that we have been asked to pay attention to (edit: but the content of said movies as well). However, the rating rule of thumb does make it a little easier for some people who walk way to close to the line IMO.

Edited November 29, 2011 by Nominee

[volgadon]

If someone wants to talk with me about the Viet Nam War, before we start the conversation I usually ask if they have seen Apocalypse Now.

I'd probably reply that I like Conrad better.

Edited November 29, 2011 by volgadon

[thesometimesaint]

cinepro:

I've never had any filtering service. Never felt the need. I taught my kids to avoid "bad" movies. Now with kids of their own they follow the same concept of teach them correct principles and let them govern themselves.

[ERMD]

I absolutely sustain everything President Monson has said about Rated R movies.

Excellent! This is from his remarks in the priesthood session of April conference:

"Many movies and television shows portray behavior which is in direct opposition to the laws of God. Do not subject yourself to the innuendo and outright filth which are so often found there."

Fortunately, I think this spans more than R movies.

ETA: Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

Edited November 29, 2011 by ERMD

[cinepro]

Excellent! This is from his remarks in the priesthood session of April conference:

"Many movies and television shows portray behavior which is in direct opposition to the laws of God. Do not subject yourself to the innuendo and outright filth which are so often found there."

Fortunately, I think this spans more than R movies.

ETA: Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to hearken than the fat of rams.

I absolutely agree with (and sustain) President Monson's statement, although I do watch James Bond movies which are filled with "innuendo" so I follow imperfectly.

I disagree with any conjecture that it applies to all Rated R movies.

Ultimately, those who view the issue as one of "obedience" and "testimony" instead of "prudence" and "wisdom" seem close to "looking beyond the mark".

As Elder Cook described it:

Today there is a tendency among some of us to “look beyond the mark” rather than to maintain a testimony of gospel basics. We do this when we substitute the philosophies of men for gospel truths, engage in gospel extremism, seek heroic gestures at the expense of daily consecration, or elevate rules over doctrine. Avoiding these behaviors will help us avoid the theological blindness and stumbling that Jacob described.

But I don't begrudge anyone for that attitude (I just disagree with it), especially with stories like these being publicized:

After they had birthday cake and Trisha opened her presents, she pulled out the video. “Look what movie I have. My big brother rented it.”

Janelle recognized the video as an R-rated movie. In family home evening, her parents had talked about the right and wrong kind of movies. She knew if she stayed to watch it, she would be going against the standards they’d tried to teach her and against the teachings of the prophet. President Hinckley had spoken out against seeing bad movies. Then she thought of the promises she’d made at the time of her baptism.

“I’m sorry,” she quietly said to Trisha, “but I can’t watch this. I think I’d better call my mom. She’ll come to get me.”

Edited November 29, 2011 by cinepro

[Calm]

But watching R rated movies? It's nothing to lose your integrity over. If you have covenanted to obey the church/prophet, and it isn't a big deal, why disobey? For me, my integrity is on the line- THAT is the issue.

I look on it as I do the WoW. There are medically speaking great benefits to be had from drinking green tea (I am not using red wine because there are enough studies out there that show detrimental effects as well, including breast cancer, but I don't remember any studies showing green tea as problematic). One could use these benefits as justification for using green tea from time to time when one feels the need for extra help medicinally speaking.....or one can take the time and make the effort to find other compounds that provide these benefits without violating the principles of the Word of Wisdom.

Same principle.....if one wants to experience the reality of war for some reason, feels it would be beneficial to become more aware of its implications, its effects on others, there are other avenues to learn besides R rated movies. Before Schindler's List came out, I had read the Rise and Fall of the Third Reich....it was gory and violent and full of factual information and photos....what it did not do was attempt to glorify anyone involved, it did not attempt to turn horrors into entertainment nor did it include musical accompaniment intended to provoke uncontrolled subconscious responses. When I felt horror and disgust it was because there were horrible and disgusting things, not because the music told me to feel that way or an actor on a scene was 'emoting' fear and horror.

When one watches movies, the visuals that fill your eyes, the music and sounds that exclude everything else, etc. turn the experience into one of emotional and physical response rather than an educational/intellectual learning experience. This is not inherently a bad thing, but I think it is rather important to consider when placing ourselves in the hands of total strangers to more or less manipulate us to experience something in the way they want us to experience it rather than allowing ourselves to determine this. This is why I prefer books and other less all invasive methods that have less of an imposed emotional context for learning of controversial issues so that emotions don't colour the picture inappropriate. Too often I've seen people, especially children, confuse their emotional response with a rational analysis of an event being portrayed cinematically.

Movies can be useful for educational purposes...some old Disney movies shown in school were some of my favorite memories of early science classes, but when they come with a price tag I don't want to pay....I think it's better to take time to find the information in a less manipulative setting.

[cinepro]

On another note, this is one of the few times I've ever seen a movie specifically "called out" in Conference, by a prophet no less.

It is interesting to observe how the father of lies, that wily son of the morning who was cast out of heaven, always has the means and capacity to entice, to invite, to gather to his ways those who are not strong and alert. Very recently a certain moving picture was acclaimed the best of the year. I have not seen it, nor do I anticipate doing so. But I am told that it is laden with sex, that the use of profanity runs throughout.

President Hinckley

It was the April 2003 Conference. Can you guess which "moving picture" he was referring to?

Edited November 29, 2011 by cinepro

[Calm]

I lived in Canada for many years, the rating system is different but it was still perfectly easy for me to tell what was and wasn't appropriate based on my previous familiarity with the rating system. It is also perfectly easy for me to tell that the system needs an overhaul and while it may be fine to rely on for an upper limit, there is a larger and larger grey area that needs personal attention to make a good judgment.

What I'd like to know is why in saying a certain word once or twice, it is considered acceptable, but saying it just once more somehow instantly renders it a vulgarity we need to protect our children from....such reasoning would have cops standing by making sure they got an accurate count of how many times a parent hit their child to make sure they didn't go over the acceptable limit. Or watching someone fondle a woman a few times and then after just one more time, arrest them for molestation.

Makes no sense to me, but it is a great way to get kids and adults thinking that certain words and actions are more mature or exciting, but most certainly acceptable.

[seriously honestly]

On another note, this is one of the few times I've ever seen a movie specifically "called out" in Conference, by a prophet no less.

It was the April 2003 Conference. Can you guess which "moving picture" he was referring to?

I give up...

[Senator]

I give up...

It was Chicago.

I saw it.

[BCSpace]

... However, the counsel to not watch R-rated movies is official doctrine...

So is that what this thread is about? Shall we change the title to "Should we obey official doctrine"?

Maybe the answers would be a bit different if that was the question.

Sure. And I'll bet some would distinguish between counsel and a command. Me? I halt between the two to be frank.

[KevinG]

Actually, yes, what's the big deal?

None at all. Unless of course you have covenanted not to drink coffee.

[KevinG]

I'm still trying to figure out how Brother Orsen Scott Cards "Enders Game" could be put into movie form without being stripped of its content or given an NC-17 rating for violence.

The Book of Mormon movie presents a similar conundrum.

[altersteve]

I'm still trying to figure out how Brother Orsen Scott Cards "Enders Game" could be put into movie form without being stripped of its content or given an NC-17 rating for violence.

The Book of Mormon movie presents a similar conundrum.

Funny you say that. I recently re-read Ender's Game and I was surprised; I forgot how violent it was. Not just violent, but bloody. Still, can't wait for the movie, I'm a huge OSC fan.