One of my favourite media-related stories of my childhood stems from the summer of 1985. The date is relevant. Given that it was a quiet night and my family had nothing else to do, we decided to go to a movie. The problem was finding a movie that we could all enjoy. My parents were very careful with what movies they let us see and, with a seven year age difference between my sister and I (ages 15 and 8, respectively), that made choosing a flick somewhat of a challenge at times. Nevertheless, when decision time came, my father opted to take my sister to Back to the Future. However, because of the presence of bad language in BTTF, my mother decided instead to bring me to a safer choice - the latest Disney animated feature... The Black Cauldron.
I love this story because, at least to me now, it seems absurd. Why is this funny? Because, in their efforts to keep me safe, they unwittingly brought me into what is widely known as one of the darkest Disney features of all time. Seriously. Instead of taking me into a film about a young man who unwittingly drives his car 30 years into the past, my parents brought me into a film about a dark wizard who seeks to create an army of undead warriors to conquer the world. Black Cauldron was such an embarrassment to Disney's squeaky clean image at the time that they banned the film from video release until viewer demand in 1998 brought it to light for a limited time. Just for a laugh, check out the theatrical trailer. Experience the childlike wonder. Lol.
Don't get me wrong. I thoroughly applaud and appreciate my parents for seeking to make wise decisions in my viewing. They didn't know what the film was about and were trying to keep their kid away from language that they didn't want them to repeat. As a parent now, I feel like I understand that decision more and more each day. Still, situations like this have always caused me to come back to one question:
What makes something inappropriate?
The question of content vs. context has been one that has weighed on my heart for years now. I mean, how much swearing is too much? Is it okay? Does nudity have a place in film artistically? What about violence? I have often wondered this because, really, I believe that 'the Church' really oversimplifies the issue. Because of our puritanical roots, we tend to deem a film 'okay' if it is without bad language or nudity. (Let's face it, violence isn't really even on the radar in our culture... unless it's graphic or gory.) I can count off numerous times when people have spoken to me about content in film and debated the appropriateness of content. (Once, I even had one person tell me that Spiderman was pretty good... 'there was that one passionate kiss, but other than that...') Although, is that really the issue? No one argues over Michaelangelo's David as pornographic, even though his dangly bits are out for all to see. Yet, in a film, it's an automatic NC-17 rating from the MPAA. Although I'm not arguing for increased nudity in film, I'm merely trying to point out what might be considered to be a double standard.
At present, there is currently a debate about the content of The King's Speech, leading frontrunner at the Oscars this year. (You can read about the controversy here and here.) In an effort to make the film more 'family friendly', the studio has opted to rerelease it without some of the language present. Apparently, the majority of the language takes place in one scene where the King's language coach attempts to get him to curse. As a result, the film received an 'R' rating from the MPAA. As I write this, I haven't seen the film so it is difficult for me to comment directly about it. However, I am curious as to whether or not this is necessary. Does context count for nothing? (Interestingly enough, I have had several people from our church congregation talk to me about the scene--including family members--who have said that the use of language in this setting 'didn't bother them'.)
There is no question that we must be concerned about our media intake. Scripture demands critical hearts. Philippians 4:8 invites us to think about things that are 'noble' and 'praiseworthy'... but are the lines drawn so clearly at content? I do not believe that this is the case. Themes and worldview are also worthy of note in our discussions as well and, I believe, can trump content in the right context. Certainly, there are instances where films produce absolute garbage in terms of content and context--and I'm not calling for the embrace of everything and the removal of personal boundaries. Such talk would be foolish. Yet, I do hope to maybe challenge the way many people view this issue. I expect that this will be a topic that is recurring over my next few postings (outside of reviews) as I attempt to explore this issue. I would like to address issue such as the nature of pornography and where do boundaries come into play. I'm no expert. Just a guy asking questions.
Still, let's see where this goes.
No comments:
Post a Comment