Comments on: Rated R for Violence, Language, Nudity, and Sexual Content http://121blog.org/2008/11/03/rated-r-for-violence-language-nudity-and-sexual-content/ Fri, 26 Feb 2010 18:57:53 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 By: dan hansen http://121blog.org/2008/11/03/rated-r-for-violence-language-nudity-and-sexual-content/#comment-81 dan hansen Tue, 11 Nov 2008 15:35:17 +0000 http://121blog.wordpress.com/?p=126#comment-81 Interesting points. A film that comes to mind when you speak of artistic expression is the 40 year old virgin. Say what you will, but in the end, Andy waits until marriage to have sex, and all the friends that tried to get him laid had their own problems as a result. Judd Apatow seems to support the idea of abstinence, and supports sanctity of marriage....even if it is really rated R. Interesting points. A film that comes to mind when you speak of artistic expression is the 40 year old virgin. Say what you will, but in the end, Andy waits until marriage to have sex, and all the friends that tried to get him laid had their own problems as a result. Judd Apatow seems to support the idea of abstinence, and supports sanctity of marriage….even if it is really rated R.

]]> By: geneschlesinger http://121blog.org/2008/11/03/rated-r-for-violence-language-nudity-and-sexual-content/#comment-78 geneschlesinger Sun, 09 Nov 2008 23:37:20 +0000 http://121blog.wordpress.com/?p=126#comment-78 Very thoughtful questions, and important to ask. I have the tendency to agree with you about the sex-act thing. I personally try to avoid seeing nudity, for my own good (whether through scene skipping, or the old faithful "look away" method). I know some people who say that they can see nudity in a film without lusting. So for THEM, the situation is different. Interestingly, this is an issue that we come upon almost exclusively in filmic media. Almost no one criticizes the Venus de Milo, even though she is topless (and armless). We still need to ask about the actors involved though, especially when the scene goes beyond nudity to some sort of simulation of sex. Are they not being led into lust by this action? I think that, in general, most films could deal with the reality of sex, and even sexual sin without actual depictions of sex. Suggestion and inference can go a long way towards indicating what's going on behind closed doors. At the same time, I think of the film Hardcore, by Paul Schrader (who frequently collaborated with Martin Scorsese). I've not seen it, but my understanding is that it deals with a father whose daughter runs away and becomes involved in the sex industry in California. The father heads out to bring his daughter home. In the midst of this, the vicissitudes of the 1970s pornography industry are put on display. I think that the story is worth telling, it's about redemption (and it exposes some of the evils of pornography). And I'm not sure how well or realistically it could be told without some of the sexual content. I know my own limits, and so, won't ever see the film to make an educated judgment. In fact, I wouldn't recommend it to others. But I do think that it shows some instances where some things with which I am uncomfortable are artistically viable. To sum up, my main concerns are: 1) The ethics involved in the actual production films with sexual material. 2) The condition of the heart of those who watch such films (are they being let into lust?). But I also recognize that there are probably some cases where it can be a valid form of artistic expression (e.g., if it's there to depict reality, even fallen reality, but not to glorify the sin), even if it's not a form of art that I need to enjoy. Very thoughtful questions, and important to ask. I have the tendency to agree with you about the sex-act thing. I personally try to avoid seeing nudity, for my own good (whether through scene skipping, or the old faithful “look away” method). I know some people who say that they can see nudity in a film without lusting. So for THEM, the situation is different.

Interestingly, this is an issue that we come upon almost exclusively in filmic media. Almost no one criticizes the Venus de Milo, even though she is topless (and armless).

We still need to ask about the actors involved though, especially when the scene goes beyond nudity to some sort of simulation of sex. Are they not being led into lust by this action?

I think that, in general, most films could deal with the reality of sex, and even sexual sin without actual depictions of sex. Suggestion and inference can go a long way towards indicating what’s going on behind closed doors.

At the same time, I think of the film Hardcore, by Paul Schrader (who frequently collaborated with Martin Scorsese). I’ve not seen it, but my understanding is that it deals with a father whose daughter runs away and becomes involved in the sex industry in California. The father heads out to bring his daughter home. In the midst of this, the vicissitudes of the 1970s pornography industry are put on display. I think that the story is worth telling, it’s about redemption (and it exposes some of the evils of pornography). And I’m not sure how well or realistically it could be told without some of the sexual content. I know my own limits, and so, won’t ever see the film to make an educated judgment. In fact, I wouldn’t recommend it to others. But I do think that it shows some instances where some things with which I am uncomfortable are artistically viable.

To sum up, my main concerns are: 1) The ethics involved in the actual production films with sexual material. 2) The condition of the heart of those who watch such films (are they being let into lust?).

But I also recognize that there are probably some cases where it can be a valid form of artistic expression (e.g., if it’s there to depict reality, even fallen reality, but not to glorify the sin), even if it’s not a form of art that I need to enjoy.

]]> By: dan hansen http://121blog.org/2008/11/03/rated-r-for-violence-language-nudity-and-sexual-content/#comment-77 dan hansen Sun, 09 Nov 2008 22:39:09 +0000 http://121blog.wordpress.com/?p=126#comment-77 Aha! wonderful post. Applicable to me as you know. i've thought and wrestled over this topic for a few years. What to censor? what not to censor? I feet that the main reason why most "christian" movies suck is because of their failure to portray this fallen world. Language especially. I've been looking forward to the first "christian" film with a PG-13 rating. However, I have reservations depicting sexual acts on screen. I understand that it might be my own conviction, but somehow i can't find a way to argue that the act isn't soft core pornography. I'd like to hear your reaction to this. thanks gene -dan Aha! wonderful post.

Applicable to me as you know.

i’ve thought and wrestled over this topic for a few years. What to censor? what not to censor?

I feet that the main reason why most “christian” movies suck is because of their failure to portray this fallen world. Language especially. I’ve been looking forward to the first “christian” film with a PG-13 rating.

However, I have reservations depicting sexual acts on screen. I understand that it might be my own conviction, but somehow i can’t find a way to argue that the act isn’t soft core pornography. I’d like to hear your reaction to this.

thanks gene

-dan

]]>