MPAA rates film PG because of too much religious content

Forums: Parenting And Childcare
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Incredibly, Hollywood evidently now equates religious belief with other things that warrant "parental guidance" i.e. profanity, "some violence or brief nudity". I find the last sentence in the quote below particulary noteworthy...

Quote:

Narrow focus draws 'PG' rating for Baptist-backed film

By TERRY MATTINGLY
Scripps Howard News Service
07-JUN-06

The Motion Picture Association of America is crystal clear when it describes why its "PG" rating exists _ it's a warning flag.

"The theme of a PG-rated film may itself call for parental guidance," states the online explanation of the rating system. "There may be some profanity in these films. There may be some violence or brief nudity. ... The PG rating, suggesting parental guidance, is thus an alert for examination of a film by parents before deciding on its viewing by their children. Obviously such a line is difficult to draw."

Disagreements are a given. The Christian moviemakers behind a low-budget film called "Facing the Giants" were stunned when the MPAA pinned a PG rating on their gentle movie about a burned-out, depressed football coach whose life _ on and off the field _ takes a miraculous turn for the better.

"What the MPAA said is that the movie contained strong 'thematic elements' that might disturb some parents," said Kris Fuhr, vice president for marketing at Provident Films, which is owned by Sony Pictures. Provident plans to open the film next fall in 380 theaters nationwide with the help of Samuel Goldwyn Films, which has worked with indie movies like "The Squid and the Whale."

Which "thematic elements" earned this squeaky-clean movie its PG?

"Facing the Giants" is too evangelistic.

The MPAA, noted Fuhr, tends to offer cryptic explanations for its ratings. In this case, she was told that it "decided that the movie was heavily laden with messages from one religion and that this might offend people from other religions. It's important that they used the word 'proselytizing' when they talked about giving this movie a PG. ...

"It is kind of interesting that faith has joined that list of deadly sins that the MPAA board wants to warn parents to worry about."

source

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 984 • Replies: 16

No top replies

Good for the MPAA. As a parent, I don't think I'd like my child to be exposed to a lot of seductive proselityzing by any one particular faith without having discussed these things with her/him first in some detail. That's how kids get suckered into joining cults. The operative sentence is the next to the last in that article, not the last. Pushing an evangelical point of view is apt to offend some whose religious sentiments are quite different. Probably there's nothing wrong with the movie, but anything with a theme like that requires some "parental guidance," I believe.

0 Replies

This makes sense to me, actually. If the point of "PG" is to say "Hey, parents, there's something in this film that you may be concerned about your kid seeing," that film getting the rating certainly makes as much sense to me as a film getting the rating for a flash of bare boobs. (Or does that earn it an "R"?)

I, personally, have way more tolerance for my kid seeing nudity than for her seeing violence. And while I don't mind if she sees religion -- as in, it's a fact of life, people believe these things, that's fine -- I wouldn't want her to see something that could reasonably be called "prosletyzing", not for a while anyway. (She's 5.)

If the "prosletyzing" label is not reasonable, that's something else.

0 Replies

Very few movies earn a G rating. It is considered the box office kiss of death.

PG is not much above that.

I think you might be confusing PG with PG-13. That's the boob flash, swear word rating.

0 Replies

I think the MPAA decision was the correct one, and I am a Christian.

0 Replies

I agree with Eva, and I am not a Christian. I think that any movie that has a proselytizing agenda, be it religious or political, needs to have the PG label. A parent needs to know if there is a strong theme in a film that they might not want their children to be exposed.

0 Replies

I think you ladies are poopity heads, and you ought to flash yer boobies at me so that i can decide for sure . . .

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

I think you ladies are poopity heads, and you ought to flash yer boobies at me so that i can decide for sure . . .

Be careful what you wish for!!!

0 Replies

The scene in question is described in the article. I've copied it below.

Quote:

But the scene that caught the MPAA's attention may have been the chat between football coach Grant Taylor _ played by Alex Kendrick _ and a rich brat named Matt Prader. The coach says that he needs to stop bad-mouthing his bossy father and get right with God.

The boy replies: "You really believe in all that honoring God and following Jesus stuff? ... Well, I ain't trying to be disrespectful, but not everybody believes in that."

The coach replies: "Matt, nobody's forcing anything on you. Following Jesus Christ is the decision that you're going to have to make for yourself. You may not want to accept it, because it'll change your life. You'll never be the same."

This scene simply depicts a statement of one guy's faith to someone who is not of the same faith. The phrase that accompanies the PG rating is "Some material may not be suitable for children." Since when are statements of faith "not suitable for children" in the same manner as violence, profanity, and sex are "not suitable for children"?

There are very few people who would argue that exposure to sexual situations, violence or profanity is OK for children below age 13. On the other hand, there are many (I would guess the majority of Americans) who would argue that exposure to religous belief is beneficial (certainly not harmful) to pre-teens. That the MPAA has now decided that such exposure is detrimental is simply nonsense and another example of liberal Hollywood extremism.

0 Replies

Quote:

This scene simply depicts a statement of one guy's faith to someone who is not of the same faith. The phrase that accompanies the PG rating is "Some material may not be suitable for children." Since when are statements of faith "not suitable for children" in the same manner as violence, profanity, and sex are "not suitable for children"?

Children are very impressionable. Most parents want to be the people who inculcate their kids with ethical and/or religious values. The parents need to know that this movie has an agenda, and then decide if the film is something that they want their kids to see.

It is not a matter of something "not being suitable for children". Unfortunately, the rating system is only a rough guide. The PG rating puts parents on notice that they need to look into the film, before taking their kids to see it. Intelligent parents will read some reviews before making a decision with reference to their children.

0 Replies

another gay marriage/Schiavo red herring... they'll try to get people stirred up about it and meanwhile no one's paying attention to the war fubar, the immigration fubar, the gas price fubar, the general bush administration fubar. Hopefully anyway.

0 Replies

slkshock7, quoting the article, wrote:

The coach replies: "Matt, nobody's forcing anything on you. Following Jesus Christ is the decision that you're going to have to make for yourself. You may not want to accept it, because it'll change your life. You'll never be the same."

Why isn't following Judaism a decision he's going to have to make for himself? Why is not following Hinduism not a decision he is going to have to make? Why are not following Buddhism, Janism, Parsi-ism, Sihk-sim in the list. Why is not following Mohammed a decision he is going to have to make for himself? Why is not Santaria or Vodoun a possibility?

This passage assumes that everyone must confront a belief in Jesus. That excludes the spiritual beliefs of more than half the people in the world.

0 Replies

you forgot bag ism and drag ism. Expect a call from Yoko.

0 Replies

Quote:

This passage assumes that everyone must confront a belief in Jesus. That excludes the spiritual beliefs of more than half the people in the world.

I find the religiocentrism of the fundamentalist Christians appalling and obnoxious.........................also frightening, because with our "dear" president, religion and politics are being stirred up into a rather messy stew.

0 Replies

Re: MPAA rates film PG because of too much religious content

Quote:

"It is kind of interesting that faith has joined that list of deadly sins that the MPAA board wants to warn parents to worry about."

This quote encapsulates the fundamental misunderstanding underlying this article. The MPAA ratings, unlike the opinions of a Christian priest, do not exist to warn everyone about deadly sins. They exist to warn whichever parents it may concern about things they don't want their children to see. And some parents don't want their children to be evangelized by a movie.

slkshock7 wrote:

There are very few people who would argue that exposure to sexual situations, violence or profanity is OK for children below age 13.

Boomerang seems to be right: You are confusing PG with PG-13. I agree it would be absurd to label as "PG-13" the scence described in the article -- but that's not what the MPAA did.

0 Replies

Yes, it's a red herring. And no, it's not a matter of "liberal Hollywood extremism" (what a kneejerk reaction!)

Even though I am a Christian, there are many factions of Christianity that I don't agree with. Anytime my under-13 child is exposed to proscelytizing, be it Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, athiestic, or whatever, I'd like to be warned. It's as simple as that.

0 Replies

It really is an election year, isn't it. PG means parental guidance suggested. That's all. If the scene was one of a muslim coach telling a young man that he would have to decide whether to submit the will of Allah, I imagine some parents would be greatful for the PG rating as well. Personally, I would just like to be aware if there is the potential that something in the movie could need my follow up or explanation.

0 Replies

MPAA rates film PG because of too much religious content

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know