cinepro Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 The Groupon Guide to: Movie RatingsNothing poses a bigger threat to our nation’s youth than exposure to images of the human body or words that describe going to the bathroom. Use the following rating guides to keep your child safe from that torrent of filth they call "the movie business":G: These movies contain just the right amount of sleaze: none. Enjoy your movie about a towel who saves Christmas or a mouse who goes in some direction and becomes a cowboy.PG: Still OK for the wee ones, these movies are usually rated as such for depicting animals talking, thus destroying everything we know about the natural order.PG-13: Oh boy, here we go. Use your discretion here. These movies are allowed to have one scene of brief spitting and often feature frank depictions of France.R: For adults only! Be prepared to see machine guns wearing bras or two cars with giant lips on their grills smash into each other.X: My cousin is allowed to watch these. He has real nunchucks that his stepdad bought him.
Kenngo1969 Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 I think this is a worthwhile contribution to the discussion.http://www.deseretnews.com/article/700078788/What-happened-to-G-rated-movies-aimed-at-us-adults.html
cinepro Posted December 2, 2011 Posted December 2, 2011 I think this is a worthwhile contribution to the discussion.http://www.deseretne...-us-adults.htmlFrom the article:In the end, if the movie is good, it shouldn't matter what the rating is.Truer words were never spoken.
volgadon Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 or a mouse who goes in some direction and becomes a cowboy.A Jewish mouse!
Nominee Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 From the article:"In the end, if the movie is good, it shouldn't matter what the rating is."Truer words were never spoken. I like this quote from the article:"Movies are, by their nature, never "realistic." They are projected images on a larger-than-life screen, and though some reflect real life better than others, they remain illusions."
Nominee Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Then I guess no one who doesn't have a radio or access to the internet can listen to the prophets and apostles during General Conference.They could go to the Stake Center and watch General Conference there. Also, they could purchase or borrow the Ensign and read General Conference. Just sayin'
volgadon Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 They could go to the Stake Center and watch General Conference there... Just sayin' On a tv?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Nominee Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 On a tv?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????Yep. I should have just left it with borrow an Ensign. Live and learn.
WalkerW Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Have not read the entire thread, so forgive me if these articles have already been mentioned. Worth reading:Jana K. Riess, "Seek Ye Out the Best Flicks: R-Rated Movies That Have Helped Me Think About the Gospel," Sunstone 128 (July 2003).John Hatch, "Can "Good Mormons" Watch R-Rated Movies?" Sunstone 126 (March 2003): starts pg. 16.Orson Scott Card, "Is There an R-rated Movie Commandment?" (May 15, 2004)Linda and Richard Eyre, "Why We Hate Movie Ratings," Deseret News (Jan. 14, 2011). Edited December 3, 2011 by WalkerW
WalkerW Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 A Jewish mouse!A Russian-Jewish mouse! (if you're referencing what I think you're referencing)Unfortunately for him, there were cats in America.
Log Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Have not read the entire thread, so forgive me if these articles have already been mentioned. Worth reading:Jana K. Riess, "Seek Ye Out the Best Flicks: R-Rated Movies That Have Helped Me Think About the Gospel," Sunstone 128 (July 2003).John Hatch, "Can "Good Mormons" Watch R-Rated Movies?" Sunstone 126 (March 2003): starts pg. 16.Orson Scott Card, "Is There an R-rated Movie Commandment?" (May 15, 2004)Linda and Richard Eyre, "Why We Hate Movie Ratings," Deseret News (Jan. 14, 2011).It is telling that there are no GA articles in the same vein, isn't it?
WalkerW Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) I thinkIt is telling that there are no GA articles in the same vein, isn't it?Perhaps. Perhaps it is more telling that there are practically no GA articles on the subject at all.It is worth noting that the majority of the articles I provided attempt to scrounge all that has been said by GAs on the subject. Edited December 3, 2011 by WalkerW
Log Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Perhaps. Perhaps it is more telling that there are practically no GA articles on the subject at all.It is telling that the operative word in that sentence is "practically."It is worth noting that the majority of the articles I provided attempt to scrounge all that has been said by GAs on the subject.It is worth noting that the operative word is "attempt." As in "attempt" to circumvent the counsel to refrain from r - rated movies.When you have to disclaim all of your claims, what does that mean? Edited December 3, 2011 by Log
WalkerW Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) It is telling that the operative word in that sentence is "practically."I'm actually unaware of any GA articles that are dedicated to the subject. The ones I am aware of mention it in passing. I think it would be important to know the context of the talks.It is worth noting that the operative word is "attempt."I selected the word due to the possibility that some were missed. I'm unaware of any.Did you actually read the articles?As in "attempt" to circumvent the counsel to refrain from r - rated movies.Maybe. For me, the attempt is to provide context to the counsel and the principles behind it. The rating comes from the MPAA: Motion Picture Association of America. Pretty American counsel for a global church.When you have to disclaim all of your claims, what does that mean?Once again, did you read the articles? What did you disagree with? Specifics would be better than what appears to be knee-jerk rhetoric and the implicit accusation of the authors' lack of obedience. Edited December 3, 2011 by WalkerW 1
Arkholt Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Time for some argumentam ad absurdum. I would love to try an experiment:1. Come up with a fictitious, very clearly G-rated film. Make it a cartoon, even. Something kiddy.2. Come up with some promotional materials for it, but state on the materials that it's rated R. Don't include any reason why.3. Show the stuff to Mormons, and ask them if they would see it or not. Which Mormons say they will see it? What "kind" of Mormons are they? Are the "true believers" the ones who say they wouldn't see it, even if the promotional materials make the movie look "safe"?Better yet, make that movie, somehow get it rated R (pay off some MPAA exec somehow, I dunno), and see who goes and watches it. What "kind" of Mormon would go and see that? Are the "true believers" and "obedient ones" the ones who won't see it, even if it's extremely clear that there is absolutely no rated R material in it?
frankenstein Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 The US movies ratinhgs are based on surveys, the ratings board then uses the surveys in issueing ratings. All in all the US ratinhgs system is not a good basis for judgment.
Calm Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) Is there something wrong with being a "true believer"?---------While there are occasions I have heard reasoning for the choice to not view r-rated material that I viewed as rather immature, there are approaches to the subject that are as self aware and mature as a choice to examine each film on its own merits (and depending on the rationale for choosing the latter method, at times I've found the choice to exclude all r rated films on principle as more thoughtful, reasoned and mature).One can look on a refusal to watch r rated films in much the same way as the Word of Wisdom, wearing garments and any activity that one chooses to forego or undertake with the understanding one is setting oneself apart, dedicating one's life to the Lord through certain covenants. This does not make that which one rejects automatically sinful for others, it is simply a sign of commitment to the Lord.For me, there are likely worthwhile r rated films that I have missed due to what I have personally committed not to see. Perhaps I have even lost some positive growth opportunities by doing so (though honestly due to the fundamental attributes of the media I doubt that), but I consider anything lost is outweighed by how this 'setting apart' affects me personally.I view this topic much the same way I view caffeine though there has been more counsel about movies specifically than caffeine (at least that I am aware of) so my view is not identical. I do think the lack of world wide consistency is a problem, but don't really see why this becomes an issue for those in the States. I see the lack of internal consistency the primary issue if one chooses to focus on the movies themselves as the determining factor rather than a certain principle such as I describe above. Edited December 3, 2011 by calmoriah
Log Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Did you actually read the articles?Why, yes, I did read one of them. As, of course, you would have known had you read the thread.Maybe. For me, the attempt is to provide context to the counsel and the principles behind it.So, in the whole thread, which you did not read, nobody else attempted the same thing, with the same rationalizations?The rating comes from the MPAA: Motion Picture Association of America. Pretty American counsel for a global church.And yet, it was the counsel given to the global church. What did you disagree with? Specifics would be better than what appears to be knee-jerk rhetoric and the implicit accusation of the authors' lack of obedience.When you publicly rationalize and attempt to justify disobeying counsel, is that obedience? Perhaps that is what I disagree with.
supersnail Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 For example (and IMHO) the 1979 film Apocalypse Now, directed by Francis Ford Coppola, is a film that every adult in this country should see. (This film was so good that when it was re-released in 2001 in the Redux version, it drew a bigger box office that it did in 1979.)On the topic of war movies, I'm surprised Saints and Soldiers hasn't been mentioned. It's based on the Malmedy massacre and other events during the Battle of Bulge. The movie is rated PG-13. It originally had an R rating, though. Deseret Book carried the movie.I'm not baptized, but Saints and Soldiers was an influence for me as an atheist. In the movie, an atheist becomes interested in another soldier's Book of Mormon.The Motion Picture Association of America isn't God and has no priesthood authority. I do see how its ratings could be taken into consideration among other things.Most of Hollywood is garbage, not just R rated movies.
Calm Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) And yet, it was the counsel given to the global church.The problem with this claim is that MPAA ratings were not always available to others in other countries and still might not be for those who don't have Internet access.Nor does every country use a similar system (and some that do have similar labels have different standards.). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_picture_rating_system Edited December 3, 2011 by calmoriah
Senator Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 (edited) The problem with dogmatizing the RATED R counsel is that the ratings criteria rest upon a sliding scale, which hinges upon shifting cultural mores. The things for which an R rating was given in the 80s or 90s are now typical in films with a PG13 rating. Do we now need another dogmatic statement from authorities saying, "NO PG13 movies"?"Teach them correct principles and let them govern themselve". "No R rated movies" is not a principle, it's a dogma.The principle is to "seek after that which is lovely, praisworth, or of good report", and by extention to not apathetically subject ourselves to the opposite.In my estimation there are a handful of R rated moves that meets that criteria, eventhough, in order to contextually deliver the praiseworth message, it is needful to portray some of the rawness of our human experience.Don't get me wrong. I have nothing against anyone choosing to live there faith in dogmatic fashion. It is however, unsettling to have such individuals push their dogmas on others, or imply that not living according to their rules makes others less than "true believers or good members". Edited December 3, 2011 by Senator
Calm Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Do you believe that all those who choose not to view r rated moves are doing so for dogmatic reasons?
supersnail Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 On the topic of war movies, I'm surprised Saints and Soldiers hasn't been mentioned. It's based on the Malmedy massacre and other events during the Battle of Bulge. The movie is rated PG-13. It originally had an R rating, though. Deseret Book carried the movie.I guess I should have read http://www.nauvoo.com/library/card-r-rated-movie.html completely first!"There's another exceptional movie coming out soon. It's called Saints and Soldiers, and may well be the best war movie ever made -- and there have been some very fine movies that attempted to explore the moral and human dimensions of war.This film has been given a preliminary R-rating. I find this almost laughable, because I've seen more violence in movies like the Jim Carrey Grinch. And there is absolutely nothing lewd, suggestive, obscene, or immoral in this film."
Log Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 The problem with this claim is ....The claim is true as stated - the counsel given was to avoid, among others, R-rated movies.
Senator Posted December 3, 2011 Posted December 3, 2011 Do you believe that all those who choose not to view r rated moves are doing so for dogmatic reasons?Of course not.
Recommended Posts