What do you believe is more harmful in a movie (or harmful at all) ....

[DoctorGonzo]

I was browsing around, when I came across this quote:

"If you suck on a tit the movie gets an R rating. If you hack the tit off with an axe it will be PG."

- Jack Nicholson

In the United States, there seems to be an apparently hypocritical view on sex and violence in the media. Many parents on both sides of the idealogicial spectrum seem to believe violence is an accepted means of resolving disputes, that it is a natural response to many situations and/or is simply an accepted part of our society.

Furthermore, that children will not be harmed by viewing such depictions. Parents will take their young kids to extremly violent movies, yet, cover their children's eyes and complain about Hollywood's morality the first second they see a bare woman's breast. (if they see a penis, well.....sorry, show's over, folks)

Many of the same parents who find violence in films acceptable also believe that sex, or even nudity presented in a non-sexual context is abhorrant, or at least something that should be hidden from as many people as possible. That breasts and penises shouldn't even exist to you until you turn 18.

I find this odd, and I fail to see how watching mutilation in a film is somehow better, or even acceptable compared to seeing the sight of a naked man or woman.

I believe much of the hesitation comes from the fact violence is more or less (sadly enough) a deeply entrenched thing in our society. We are all familar with it from our early days, it needs little explination more than "Oh sweetie, that's not real".

Sex on the other hand, is foreign concept to most of us until we are older, and simple nudity makes it clear that adult bodies are much different than younger ones. It is natural that younger viewers will want this all explained, and I feel that no one wants to bother. It's just too damn embarassing for most people.

So, the very knowledge of sex or human anatomy gets the label of being the supreme evil to everyone under a certain age, even seeing a naked person is deemed harmful, regardless of how it is being presented.

But the most vicious acts of cruelty imagineable are percieved by many to be "OK".

This boggles my mind. Seriously.

Do you believe viewing violence is more or less harmful than viewing sexual intercourse or nudity?

Could it be our own prudishness is the one thing that makes sex such a bad thing? That we are so unable to deal with it in a rational and conicise manner, we feel that we must label it as evil? Or is viewing sex and nudity something really something that harms younger audiences?

I'm sort of without an opinion at the moment, except when it comes to the apparent hypocrisy........that pisses me off to no end.

[80sU2isBest]

I believe that sex in a movie is wrong. I also believe that gratuitis (sp?) killing is wrong. If the violence is central to the theme of the movie and actually has a good point to it, it is okay, I believe. For an example of that, to make a movie about Jesus Christ, you must show the crucifixion, for that is the central them of the story, and you can't make it look stupid. It's got to look like what it was - the most painful method of execution of those times. Also, war movies, violence is a necessary part of a movie about World War 2. So sometimes, violence is necessary. But killing for killing's sake, and excessive blood and gore? What good does that do? None, I think.

[Anthony]

It is a certain contradiction the way we are brought up and raise children, though if you ask me, its all down to the individual parents and how they see fit to raise their children.

By the time I was 10, I had been taught the facts of life and I was allowed to watch movies on my own that reached a PG rating, anything else my parents would supervise. Anyway, at around the age of ten, my dad let me watch ALIEN for the first time. He sat me down and said, 'Tony, I think you will like this film, though there are some parts with ketchup' (he always used to say that the blood in movies was ketchup sauce). Anyway, when he sad that I asked him if was allowed to see it, he basically explained to me that it was alright, as long as I realised that it was all fake, that the violence wasn't real and the effects were illusions. I nodded, watched the film and enjoyed it, after that my father didn't feel the need to supervise me anymore.

Concerning sex, ever since I was taught the facts of life my father said, ' you have a penis and the woman has a vagina, you shouldn't be afraid of the human body'. I was basically permitted to watch sex and moderate sex scenes.

I think my dad (and mum, though she was a lot more prudish, shall we say) did a good job. As a result, I have always treated the movies as movies, and I am far from a violent person. I am not saying that all parent should be the same and I am not saying that my dad was the perfect dad, I'm just saying that children are a lot more prepared for these things than parents give them credit for sometimes. If they are permitted to watch Arnold Schwarzenegger ripping people's heads off and stuffing them down their throats, they should be permitted to watch naked human bodies and how people express their love in a physical way, it is a perfectly natural thing to do.

PArents will have their own ways, however, I do think that if children are ready for violence, they are ready for sex and nudity.

Ant.

[speedracer]

Originally posted by Anthony:

If they are permitted to watch Arnold Schwarzenegger ripping people's heads off and stuffing them down their throats, they should be permitted to watch naked human bodies and how people express their love in a physical way, it is a perfectly natural thing to do.

PArents will have their own ways, however, I do think that if children are ready for violence, they are ready for sex and nudity.

Okay...but there's a difference between "expressing love in a physical way" and "James Bond snogging every woman in sight." Really, shouldn't the guy by all rights be swimming in STDs by now, and shouldn't there be an army of little Bonds hunting him down to get him to pay child support?

[Anthony]

Originally posted by speedracer:
Okay...but there's a difference between "expressing love in a physical way" and "James Bond snogging every woman in sight." Really, shouldn't the guy by all rights be swimming in STDs by now, and shouldn't there be an army of little Bonds hunting him down to get him to pay child support?

Yes, alright you caught me out there. However, it doesn't change the fact that if they're watching Arnie beating the crap out of someone to death, watching James Bond's latest sexual conquest is not going to be all that more damaging; my point was that sex and violence go together and are two sides of the of the same coin concerning the 'maturity level' for a minor's visual menu. My point wasn't that sex in the movies is always good while violence in the movies is always bad. They both go hand in hand and will do as much as harm as the parents allow if they don't introduce these concepts at the right age.

Ant.

[The Wanderer]

I guess the Christian answer to all of this is very simple: The Virgin Mother

ok, problem solved, but what if you want to make a movie about Sodom & Gomorrah?

[This message has been edited by The Wanderer (edited 01-22-2002).]

[The Wanderer]

also, is it wrong to make a movie like Psycho or A Clockwork Orange?

Should these things not be shown in the moving pictures, even though this sort of behavior exists (much like the brutality of war)?

[pax]

I believe that sex in a movie is wrong.

Why?


------------------
If you cannot live together in here, you cannot live together out there, let me tell ya. --Bono

You've got to cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice... --Bono

[The Wanderer]

because sex is bad paxetaurora

[Lemonite]

You Know, I think all movies should just go for the HUUUUGE FREUDISMs ... Everytime a sex scene shows up, let's have the 'North By Northwest', Train going into a tunnel.. Hahaha.. That hitchcock's a nutcase,

Our Newly Engagedly Hormone Crazed Gonz, I think you hit it right on the nail, PArents can explain violence in that 'it's not real', the same with why video games for little kids have people shooting people.. look at ocntra from back in the day.. But sex forces the issue with kids, and for regular adults et al, Americans at least, Sex is a taboo topic, except to those ho's that go to the beach on spring break!

But I will say this, all the movies of old, CAsablanca et al.. They didn't have all the sex and they're some of the greatest movies ever, but also our culture of nowadays, seems to want more.. more sex (But suprisingly more is not always better.. showgirls), more violence, more effects (Again.. more is not always better.. jar jar).. Just the Bigger is Better syndrome.

I remain,
L. Unplugged

[speedracer]

Originally posted by Lemonite:
You Know, I think all movies should just go for the HUUUUGE FREUDISMs ... Everytime a sex scene shows up, let's have the 'North By Northwest', Train going into a tunnel.. Hahaha.. That hitchcock's a nutcase,

(insert clip from Austin Powers here)

[pax]

because sex is bad paxetaurora

Go tell those PLEBA girls that!

------------------
If you cannot live together in here, you cannot live together out there, let me tell ya. --Bono

You've got to cry without weeping, talk without speaking, scream without raising your voice... --Bono

[80sU2isBest]

Originally posted by paxetaurora:
Why?

Religious beliefs. As a Christian, I believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong. I believe that anything that promotes sex outside of marriage is wrong. I also believe that sex is something that is for the privacy of the bedroom, between a man and his wife. Parents need to be open with their kids about sex, but the movie theatre is not where kids need to learn about it.

Here's a quote from an Alice Cooper song that pretty much sums up what our society has become obssessed with:

"Sex, death and money, honey
Makes this wicked world go round
Sex, death and money,
It's the Gospel here in Dragontown
Sex, death and money, honey
Grease the wheels and make `em fly
Sex, death and money, Sonny,
That is why we all are gonna fry."

[spinninghead77]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:

Religious beliefs. As a Christian, I believe that sex outside of marriage is wrong. I believe that anything that promotes sex outside of marriage is wrong. I also believe that sex is something that is for the privacy of the bedroom, between a man and his wife. Parents need to be open with their kids about sex, but the movie theatre is not where kids need to learn about it.

I respect everyone else's opinion in this matter, but the above comment has one major flaw. It is assuming that everyone is Christian. Since you are living in a country that has freedom of religion, media should not be based on what one religious group deems to be moral, or immoral.

Sex doesn't just exist between married people, and whether or not we think that is right, it doesn't change that fact. Sex occurs in many different situations, between man and woman, between man and man, between man and prostitute, between married woman and single man, between 4 people at a time, etc. I feel that there is nothing wrong with showing these different types of relationships, as long as the movie is rated accordingly.

What I do feel is wrong, is when people expect the media to do their parenting for them. If you don't want your kids to see Sex and Violence in a movie, then don't let them!!!

[IvanClaytonJnr]

censorship/ kiss political asses by cuting the movie scenes , everything else can and must be on cinema screen .

[IvanClaytonJnr]

Freedom fucking rules forever , movies must be real and totally 100% free of censors , but ofcource there should be all these " PG-13 " stuff , only this .

[IvanClaytonJnr]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:
I believe that sex in a movie is wrong. I also believe that gratuitis (sp?) killing is wrong. If the violence is central to the theme of the movie and actually has a good point to it, it is okay, I believe. For an example of that, to make a movie about Jesus Christ, you must show the crucifixion, for that is the central them of the story, and you can't make it look stupid. It's got to look like what it was - the most painful method of execution of those times. Also, war movies, violence is a necessary part of a movie about World War 2. So sometimes, violence is necessary. But killing for killing's sake, and excessive blood and gore? What good does that do? None, I think.

I suggest , U go and see french film " DOBERMAN" , you'll love It !

HERE'S COMES JOHNNY YYEAR , YAER , YEAR!!

[spinninghead77]

Originally posted by 80sU2isBest:



80s writes:
Your post is the one with flaws:
1)Where did I assume that the entire country is Christian?
2)Who said anything about making these kinds of movies illgal? If you think I said that, show me where I said it. I said I think it's wrong to show sex in movies. That was my answer to the question that was asked.
3)I don't expect the media to parent my child. Believe me, I don't want this secular society to parent my child. But you know what? It's absolutely impossible to watch your child 24 hours a day. Media should eb MUCH MUCH more responsible.


[This message has been edited by 80sU2isBest (edited 01-23-2002).]

I apoligize if I misinterpreted your response. I thought that you were saying that Sex shouldn't be allowed in movies because "As a Christian, you feel that premarital sex, and sex in movies is wrong"!! I was just speaking on behalf on Non-Christians, who don't like having their freedom taken away because of other's beliefs.

However, I do stand by my belief that parents should be responsible for what children are viewing and not the media. You are right, Parents can't be with their kids 24/7, but it is up to the parents to ensure that their children are surrounded by people (teachers, babysitters, friends, etc) that share similar values, and to instill these values into their children by the time that they get to an age where they can make their own decisions about what to watch.

[melon]

1) I think we need to give children more credit than we'd like to give them. Children are more perceptive and can discern fact from fiction if we give them the chance, but perhaps it is parental nature to think that your children are perpetually four years old. I think that the approach that Anthony's father did with him on "Alien" was the responsible way to handle the issue. Suppression often leads to rebellion and obsession with the exact things we're forbidden to do.

2) The film rating system is a reflection of tradition and cultural bias. In America, hate speech is readily protected, but not sex. Hence, all the push for internet regulation in Congress was on regulating pornography. Never mind that the KKK and the Aryan Nation can have a ready audience.

In Europe, from what I've surmised, it is the opposite: the push for internet regulation has been on regulating hate speech. Sex is more culturally acceptable in media. I can only think this to be the case, because America was founded on Puritanism and Europe is still scarred from World War II and Nazism (not to mention it sent all of its religious "fanatics" to America in the 1600s and 1700s). Hence, you have two different sets of priorities.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time

[melon]

One more thing...

The solution should be to reform the "R" and "NC-17" rating systems. As it stands, both sex and violence is lumped in one category, regardless if it is gratuitous or appropriate for the subject matter. Perhaps we need a subcategory with both:

"GS" = gratuitous sex
"GV" = gratuitious violence
"GSV" = gratuitous sex and violence
"AS" = artistic sex
"AV" = artistic violence
"ASV" = artistic sex and violence

Hence, I would have rated the uncensored "Eyes Wide Shut," "NC-AS," to let people know that there is sex done in an artistic way, but is inappropriate for children. "Saving Private Ryan" should have received "R-AV," since the violence was appropriate for the story. "Debbie Does Dallas" should get "NC-GS" and "Natural Born Killers" "R-GV." Does this make any sense?

I think that NC-17 rated films do deserve a way into the theatres, but, as it stands, it undeservedly has been lumped in the same category as pornography, which is unfair. Other nations successfully have mature films in theatres, but America hasn't had the same luck. That needs to be changed.

Melon

------------------
"He had lived through an age when men and women with energy and ruthlessness but without much ability or persistence excelled. And even though most of them had gone under, their ignorance had confused Roy, making him wonder whether the things he had striven to learn, and thought of as 'culture,' were irrelevant. Everything was supposed to be the same: commercials, Beethoven's late quartets, pop records, shopfronts, Freud, multi-coloured hair. Greatness, comparison, value, depth: gone, gone, gone. Anything could give some pleasure; he saw that. But not everything provided the sustenance of a deeper understanding." - Hanif Kureishi, Love in a Blue Time