• news
  • TUESDAY JULY 4 2006 2:00 PM

Politician: Movies Should Adhere to 10 Commandments. Writers Scramble to Come Up with Plots

Conservative lawmakers want answers into why a Christian-themed sports movie got slapped with the dreaded PG rating, normally reserved for those smutty Disney films. Missouri congressman Roy Blunt claims all the God talk is the reason.

"This incident raises the disquieting possibility that the MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and violence," Blunt said in a letter to MPAA Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Dan Glickman.


Facing the Giants is about a high school football coach who relies on faith to inspire his team to victory. The Motion Picture Association of America has said it gave the film the PG rating based, in part, on some "mature" conversations in the movie, including one about pregnancy. Rep. Blunt and other GOP lawmakers are calling for an investigation into the "subjective" nature of the ratings process.

Meanwhile, the filmÂ’s producers have accepted the rating and are planning for a September 2006 release date. This is good news for at least one of the film's co-stars, whose previous roles in films such as Zombie Bloodbath 3 didn't resonate with the devoutly Christian fan base.

 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next

Comments
mamet

mamet

Charleston, SC
March 2005

JUL 04, 2006 02:06 PM


This incident raises the disquieting possibility that the MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and violence



Because all those G movies are filled with loads of scrumping...

Is this seriously what Congress has been worrying themselves with, the fucking rating of some obscure Christian movie? For fuck's sake.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

JUL 04, 2006 02:13 PM

Newsflash: The MPAA is an anonymous group of people who rate things subjectively.

If you didn't know this, and you paid them 500$ to review your movie, then you are dumb.

NinjaTech

NinjaTech

Minneapolis, MN
November 2003

JUL 04, 2006 02:20 PM

mamet said:


This incident raises the disquieting possibility that the MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and violence



Because all those G movies are filled with loads of scrumping...



I thought I was the only one who used "scrumping". Huh.

_Elichrusos

_Elichrusos

Australia
November 2004

JUL 04, 2006 02:22 PM

I was under the impression that exposure to religion was something that fell under parental discretion, no? Surely the G tag is applied to movies ALL parents should be comfortable letting their children see?

Idiot senators abound.

Remj

Remj

Seattle, WA
April 2003

JUL 04, 2006 02:24 PM

I liked listening to a Kevin Smith director discussion on one of his DVDs...he's basically like "yeah, they can't tell you what is specifically over the line. That's too much like censorship. You can suggest what kinds of cuts might be appropriate, and see if they give it away."

And then you make the cuts.

filmjedi

filmjedi

Brighton, MA
June 2004

JUL 04, 2006 03:00 PM

the trick to faking out the mpaa is do what american pie did.

shoot jim on the table, tablefucking a pie. the mpaa says no, then you put in the shot that everyone saw of jim fucking the pie.

morons. we all know fucking while standing up is hotter.

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

JUL 04, 2006 03:08 PM

Remj said:
I liked listening to a Kevin Smith director discussion on one of his DVDs...he's basically like "yeah, they can't tell you what is specifically over the line. That's too much like censorship. You can suggest what kinds of cuts might be appropriate, and see if they give it away."

And then you make the cuts.



He also just got Clerks II reviewed, and they gave it back to him and told him it was fine, with an R rating.
That left everyone very confused to say the least.

jake_lex

jake_lex

Lexington, KY
February 2003

JUL 04, 2006 03:26 PM

You know, if these people are right, and the movie got a PG for the fact that it was explictly evangelizing for fundamentalist Christianity, then the MPAA did its job. That's something a parent would want to know, that they should consider if they want their kid to see it or not within what they want them to know of religion.

This is more fundamentalist propaganda to keep up the bullshit notion of a "war on Christianity".

mingol

mingol

Singapore
July 2005

JUL 04, 2006 03:29 PM

Rep. Blunt and other GOP lawmakers are calling for an investigation into the "subjective" nature of the ratings process.



What?!? You mean the ratings process is subjective?!?

OMG! Who knew? eeek

mamet

mamet

Charleston, SC
March 2005

JUL 04, 2006 03:33 PM

mingol said:

Rep. Blunt and other GOP lawmakers are calling for an investigation into the "subjective" nature of the ratings process.



What?!? You mean the ratings process is subjective?!?

OMG! Who knew? eeek



This guy. That's why he brings you "objective" reviews.

kitschy

kitschy

Raleigh, NC
July 2004

JUL 04, 2006 04:07 PM

mamet said:

This guy. That's why he brings you "objective" reviews.




OMG, that site is awesome! Now I can know for sure all the ways in which the "anti Christian Hollywood" movement is subversively twisting the youth of our nation against the lord! Oops, I meant The Lord!

biggrin

Cassiel

Cassiel

Aurora, CO
September 2004

JUL 04, 2006 05:26 PM

i just hope this doesn't inspire Cingress to try and federally mandate movie/tv ratings, or get Holywood to pass another Hays Code like way back in the day

seanvegas

seanvegas

Lincoln, NE
December 2004

JUL 04, 2006 05:30 PM

"This incident raises the disquieting possibility that the MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and violence," Blunt said in a letter to MPAA Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Dan Glickman.


I have been saying THIS for years!!!!!

SirPsychoSexy

SirPsychoSexy

Ridgewood, NJ
January 2004

JUL 04, 2006 06:07 PM

Cassiel said:
i just hope this doesn't inspire Cingress to try and federally mandate movie/tv ratings, or get Holywood to pass another Hays Code like way back in the day



They only have to threaten to do so, the movie industry always buckles like pilgrim shoes.

The last time Clinton yelled at the movie theaters, because they were not actually enforcing the ratings system by checking ID. Since they never have had to, because the ratings system is a GUIDE, not a restriction. He threatened to start regulating if they didn't make corporate rules to enforce the rating guidelines.

azathoth42

azathoth42

Dallas, TX
September 2004

JUL 04, 2006 07:30 PM

I find it a bit odd that these same republican god bullies who can't define obscenity, indecency, objectivity, WMDs, etc., suddenly find a defined border in media. Jesus, can't be obscene, the Passion of the Christ should have been a "G" rating as well I suppose. Even the director's cut with an extra 45 minutes of scourging.

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2

Next