This site has to be seen to be believed. Movie reviews which don't want want children to see any film!

Ned Flanders anyone???

Examples - can you guess the film?

"gross examination of a dog to determine its gender"

101 Dalmations

"two women arm in arm (more than friends)"

The Matrix Revolutions

Have a look - too many to mention!! But check out Mary Poppins!

Fantastic site and amazingly comprehensive!! The image of the reviewers sitting thorough Bride of Chucky, American Psycho, 8 Mile etc counting expletives and uses of "the most foul of the foul words"!!! Very specific on their categorisations of objections as well - in Natural Born Killers they object to "cartoon flashes of large character biting off the head of a smaller character (Looks like Felix, the Cat) "!! They must watch them so many times to get all that down - wonder if they are starting to harbour satanic thoughts...

Wouldn't it be easier to just not let the kids watch them? Just a suggestion

On American Psycho...

"If I had not promised a mother of a 12 year old boy with a 13 year old friend who somehow got into this movie -- the 13 year old was apparently "changed" -- that I would conduct the analysis, I would have walked out of the theater just like the theater manager strongly suggested."

I can just picture him complaining.

You should see the review for ice age :-)

Wonderful site...not!.

Hilarious... and sad.

Maybe one should do a CAP report on the Bible...

/Michael

It just goes to show that people like Flanders really exist. How do they get through the day?

...wow... That was scary!

Hmmm, I'm sort of reluctant to respond, but at the same time I want to say that I understand where this site is coming from. As a Christian I find that many of the values and beliefs I cherish are challenged by the movies, TV, and music I experience. I wish it were not so, but it's part of living in a culture that was not manufactured to my belief system. If I could get rid of a lot of the language and nudity in movies I would, along with some ideas and concepts that I simply find offensive.

However (and this is a big "however"), the answer cannot be to shut myself off from the world. The bible says to "be in the world not of the world", and that is the constant struggle I face as a Christian. So while I do try to avoid things that would cause me to "stumble" in my walk of faith (i.e.: I don't watch porn), I feel it is important that I experience the world but through the eyes of faith, filtering what I take in through my beliefs. The important thing here for me is to develop a clear understanding of what I believe is "godly" and what is "worldly", and that "filter" guides my perceptions of movies, music, etc.

Of course children don't have a fully developed "filter" in place at their young age, and in a Christian home I think it is the responsibility of the parents to act as this filter. That's why when my nieces come to stay we put a ton of our movies out of sight. I don't want them experiencing those images and concepts yet; they aren't ready. So in that sense, I understand perfectly what this web site is trying to accomplish. They are trying to help parents guide their children through "worldly" movies and determine what is "age appropriate" under a Christian world-view.

But where the site begins to weaken a bit is how it interprets what is objectionable. Evaluating Jonah diving off a ship as violent and therefore worthy of deducting points demonstrates this better than anything else. As was previously mentioned, I'd hate to see how the Bible would stand up to such an evaluation. It is far too simple to run down a checklist and say, "Murder, check! Sex, check! Language, check!" than to actually evaluate the effect these things might have on a person (or a child especially). There is sex and murder in the bible, yet I believe that spending time reading even these parts of the bible will lead to a more fully developed faith.

The more important thing, I think, is what kind of effect a movie, show, or song might have on the viewer/listener. For example: whether non-Christians are aware of it or not, there has been a huge outcry from Christians over the Harry Potter books because they can supposedly cause an "unhealthy fascination with the occult". I simply don't agree, especially when these same people praise Tolkien because he was a Christian. The problem is that both books contain magic, notions of virtue, and clear delineations between good an evil. Now I'll argue that Tolkien is better literature, but it's also far more violent. As it stands, I think both books are very good reading for young teenagers.

So to sum up, as a Christian I understand why such a web-site would be useful; however, I'm not in agreement with how the criteria is being applied. I suppose it's hard for me to laugh at such things, because while I applaud the effort, at the same I am time frustrated by the result.

I'm sorry if it appears that I'm mocking anyone's beliefs. That was never my intention I can assure you.

What I was trying to put across is how such views are not helpful, and only serve to distance themselves and the religion from society and reality.

I'm sure the reviews help some people decide what to watch, but at the same time I'm sure their time and efforts could be better spent on something a little more productive.

I'm sorry if it appears that I'm mocking anyone's beliefs.

Oh no! Not what I meant at all! I really didn't mean to come across as being mocked; I just felt compelled to comment.

What I was trying to put across is how such views are not helpful, and only serve to distance themselves and the religion from society and reality.

As was my point too, only from a different perspective. Too many Christains try to be "apart from the world" rather than "in the world but not of it" and this is a prime example I think.

Ugh, 8MM hasn't been rated yet. This was, IMO, one of the most disturbing films I've had the displeasure to watch. I mean, a movie about snuff films? Blech.

I've seen this site before, and it always angers me. I don't want to join the debate so I'll leave it at that. I'll just say that there are far better family film review sites out there.

Anyway, the thing I find humorous is that "Willow" has a relatively high score of 85

Also, at least these children will still be exposed to some good children's films like the Pixar movies.

The "weekly high-tech sarcastic update for the uk" NTK (*highly* recommended) regularly uses clips from the CAP alerts to describe films coming up on TV.

South Park is a good example:

http://www.capalert.com/capreports/southpark.htm

Talking about Flanders, I wonder how The Simpsons would fare??

Gareth

Have these people done an analysis on the acts of violence depicted in the Bible?

I totally agree with parental supervision of things which influence children, but this site amazes me. They do a fine job of analysing the movie for content, and as they say, it's not a movie review site. They let their prejudices run away from them sometimes, stopping the analysis from being objective.




Edited subjective to objective. oops

Have these people done an analysis on the acts of violence depicted in the Bible?

True, that. There are LOTS of stories that are quite gruesome in the bible. I guess David and Goliath would be censored since it's a "Stone to the head murder." Or when Jael nailed Sisera's head to the ground. "Murder by impalement to the head." Oh, and in this particular passage, she uses milk to put him to sleep, rather than the water he requested, so she could be said to "use drugs to control."

18: And Jael went out to meet Sisera, and said unto him, Turn in, my lord, turn in to me; fear not. And when he had turned in unto her into the tent, she covered him with a mantle.
19: And he said unto her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water to drink; for I am thirsty. And she opened a bottle of milk, and gave him drink, and covered him.
20: Again he said unto her, Stand in the door of the tent, and it shall be, when any man doth come and inquire of thee, and say, Is there any man here? that thou shalt say, No.
21: Then Jael Heber's wife took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples, and fastened it into the ground: for he was fast asleep and weary. So he died.
22: And, behold, as Barak pursued Sisera, Jael came out to meet him, and said unto him, Come, and I will shew thee the man whom thou seekest. And when he came into her tent, behold, Sisera lay dead, and the nail was in his temples.

I see your point of them not wanting children to see any film--though I'm inclined to agree with them as there are hardly any shows I would subject my children too. We all have different levels of what works for us.

In a similair vein, my wife and I both find Screen It! to be an invaluable site for us to use prior to renting a video or going out for a show.

No offence meant from any of my comments either.

From my point of view it was not even necessarily a religious thing - although the religion angle lends a certain amount of vocabulary which does tend to colour the text somewhat to the less religious. This site would probably provoke similar (abeit maybe less) reactions if it was taken from a purely censorious stance, without the extra religious connotations.

I noticed some of the reviewers got the balance right, seeing the context of the film and evaluating it sensibly, in some cases with high praise for the artistic content, while some appeared to be there purely counting pre-defined words or actions to get the final score. Reminds me of the story of one ISP removing all newsgroups containing the word "breast" to clean up it's content, and so removing a number of breast cancer support groups - don't know if it is actually true though.

I understand and appreciate the need for a guide to help people decide what their children should watch (I am increasingly surprised by the ratings some films are getting now - maybe I'm getting old!). People vary too much for any one guide to be appreciated by all. Mind you, I wouldn't be without all the different types of people who write/read/appreciate/applaud/laugh at/are offended by this type of thing - it makes the place more interesting!

Nick

I am increasingly surprised by the ratings some films are getting now - maybe I'm getting old!

The ratings system is completely screwed up in both directions, but that's a different thread alltogether. Movies like "Bend it Like Beckham" and "Whale Rider" should not be PG-13.

No offence meant from any of my comments either.

Again, none taken!

This site would probably provoke similar (abeit maybe less) reactions if it was taken from a purely censorious stance

The one thing I feel compelled to note is that I don't believe the intent of the site is to censor others, but allow parents to judge what is appropriate for their children to see. I didn't get the impression that this site was trying to be a judge for all people; only Christian parents of children who want to make educated decisions.

Of course, if that's the case you have to wonder why they bothered commenting some films at all. If something is rated "R", what are the odds it isn't going to have nudity, violence, language, or something objectionable in it?

This is one of the best movie review sites I've seen, if you simply invert the scores. Almost everything they find "dangerous and disturbing" is on my top 100 movies list!

I particularly enjoyed the South Park review.

Rob

I'm not sure I agree with censoring films for these sorts of reasons, I mean I never even saw television until I was over ten years old, and yet the inside of my head is way more macabre than any of my friends. And I can probably blame the vast array of literature I was exposed to - instead of sitting in front of a TV I was sitting reading everything: Westerns, Sci-Fi, Horror, Whodunnits etc etc.

My friends who watched horror movies when way too young seem pretty normal and boring.

I reckon there will just always be some wierdos and nutters, and violence on TV or in the cinema is just an excuse used. In reality the issue (in my opinion) is 99% to do with the lack of discipline and respect for family these days.

Sorry - not sure where I was going with this one. I'll stop now.

Movies like "Bend it Like Beckham" and "Whale Rider" should not be PG-13.

What was wrong with Bend it Like Beckham besides the name which made everyone I ever told about it assume it was a porn flick? I thought it was a great movie, but I don't remember even a half-decent sex scene.

Matthew

I thought it was a great movie,

I thought Bend it like Beckham was a boring re-hash of every other sports-type movie ever made. They all have exactly the same format, and they all end exactly the same way.

For once, I would like to see a sports movie where the hero loses the Big Game At The End Of The Movie.

I thought Bend it like Beckham was a boring re-hash of every other sports-type movie ever made. They all have exactly the same format, and they all end exactly the same way.

I didn't think it really was a sports movie at all though. It was far more focused on the cultural dfferences and the dificulties of being a seccond generation immigrant who isn't Indian or British, and isn't fully accepted by anyone. It also had some great jokes (“so let me get this right, the "offside" rule is when the french mustard is between the teriyaki sauce and the sea salt?") , but yes, it was quite cliched at time.

Matthew

For once, I would like to see a sports movie where the hero loses the Big Game At The End Of The Movie.

Ever hear of Rocky?

It really wasn't a sports movie.

What was wrong with Bend it Like Beckham besides the name which made everyone I ever told about it assume it was a porn flick?

Apparently it is "Rated PG-13 for language and sexual content." There's much much worse out there that isn't good for younger people. In that way, the MPAA isn't being much different from this review site. Completely objective criteria applied to all movies. As Roger Ebert pointed out, "2 Fast 2 Furious" is also PG-13. Which movie would you have your daughter watch, Tony?

I swear my parents and I watched a movie when I was younger that was rated PG on the box and in Leonard Maltin's book, yet contained at least 2 extensive nude scenes. I, of course, didn't mind, but my parents were a tad unpleased

Sorry, never saw Rocky. I was talking about movies that involve sports.

There is one guy on the team (usually the main character) who has to "come through" somehow at the end to win the big game. And there's always some sort of problem that gets solved by the winning of the game, even if it's a simple redemption of character. You see it over and over again so many times it's just irritating...

Which movie would you have your daughter watch, Tony?

I've always been in agreement with the old saying that I'd rather have my kids watch a movie about two people making love than a movie about two people trying to kill each other.

Apparently it is "Rated PG-13 for language and sexual content." There's much much worse out there that isn't good for younger people

Perhaps I was interpreting your post wrong. Were you saying that Bend It Like Beckham should have been rated lower than PG-13? I'm a bit out of touch, and consider anything under R to be a "good rating".

Matthew

Yea, I knew what you ment. I've just always thought it interesting that, so far as I know, Rocky (the first one) is the only movie out there to break the mold in that the main character loses The Big (Fight) At The End Of The Movie. (Sorry to ruin it for you.)

Actualy there was a recent movie that did this as well, but I don't want to ruin that for anyone.

I thought Bend it like Beckham was a boring re-hash of every other sports-type movie ever made. They all have exactly the same format, and they all end exactly the same way.

"Bad News Bears with Soccer Chicks."

(Disney's "The Mighty Ducks" was once described as "Bad News Bears on Ice.")

This is a subject that I have constantly been questioned on. When your favorite films include The Shawshank Redemption, Pulp Fiction, and the whole of the Matrix series narrow minded people are quick to assume your faith is weak. I am not an empty bucket into which the media can pour its thoughts at will. I recognize that when I walk into a theatre any part of my belief system may be challenged and to be honest I look forward to it.

I was interpreting your post wrong. Were you saying that Bend It Like Beckham should have been rated lower than PG-13? I'm a bit out of touch, and consider anything under R to be a "good rating".

And I was unsure how you responded to it

My implication was that PG-13 is too high a rating for those films. It gives many parents a sense that this movie isn't safe for their children. But mainly, when two movies of such different content are placed in the same category, the system doesn't make sense.

The same goes for other ratings, but I can't think of any examples at the moment.

Oh, and I like that policy, Tony.

1. My favorite movie of all time is "Taxi Driver" by Martin Scorsese.
2. It is not an endorsement of homicidal psychosis or child prostitution.
3. History shows not everybody is smart enough to realize #2.

So, yeah, I know what you mean.

(Disney's "The Mighty Ducks" was once described as "Bad News Bears on Ice.")

John G has this theory that almost every action film can be described as "Die Hard in/on a X". I've heard another theory that most films can be summarised as "Dude, Where's My X?". John R got the prize for this one: The opening scenes of "Saving Private Ryan" == "Dude, where's my leg?"

I really enjoyed the "Dogma" review

Wow - those 2 reviews are the best I've seen so far! I can just imagine somone sitting in the movie theater with their little counter things in each hand counting up 47 incidences of the most foul of the foul words. They must watch each film 8 times to get all the categories!

It reminds me of the Father Ted episode where Ted and Dougal are asked by the Bishop to protest against the film 'The Passion of St Tibulus' and end up making it the most successful film ever on the island.

(Talking about the film)
Ted: I know for a fact St. Tibulus wore more clothes then that. He was from Norway or somewhere, he'd have frozen to death

Dougal: And do you remember that bit when St. Tibulas tried to take that banana off the other lad

Ted: That wasn't a banana Dougal

[image]http://empeg.comms.net/files/187830-untitled.bmp[/image]

Edit: My picture won't show up! Feck!

Edit: My picture won't show up! Feck!

Because it's a BMP. Make it a JPG and you're golden.

Thanks Philip

Jumping in late here, but I haven't seen anyone mention this:

Of course children don't have a fully developed "filter" in place at their young age, and in a Christian home I think it is the responsibility of the parents to act as this filter.

I think that's the responsibility of parents in any home, Christian, or non.

Agreed, and I'm sure Jeff would as well. I think information on the site or others like it is informative. It seems odd to think of someone sitting in the theatre counting uses of the f word, but anything else would be open to interpretation. Mild language or adult language are phrases that are just to open to interpretation. I watched The Shawshank Redemption with some friends who felt the language was too intense. I remember mentally turning on the Wendy filter for Pulp Fiction. As has already been said but bears repeating, the failure of such sites is in the mixture of personal belief with raw data. Personal critique only means something if I know who the person is and have made the decision to trust their feelings on a subject. Raw data in this sense (meaning on this site) is more powerful and more usable. At the same time descriptions often seem worse than they are. Rob Roy for example has a rape scene. When you see the movie though the scene is troubling but less than graphic. The Outlaw Josey Whales has a rape scene as well which is far more disturbing. Placing both in the same category is not helpful to someone trying to decide whether or not to watch the movie.

I remember mentally turning on the Wendy filter for Pulp Fiction.

Wow, how does that work? I must have outdated firmware...