For those who haven’t seen the site, CapAlert is a fundamentalist Christian site dedicated to reviewing movies and pointing out how sinful they are. This is done under the pretense of protecting children from seeing movies which aren’t appropriate. Now I can understand reviewing movies which are G up to PG-13. Those are movies you might want to let your kids see, depending on the content. But R? If you’re concerned about letting your kid see a movie which may not be compatible with the morals you’re trying to instill in them, why would you even think about letting them see an R-rated movie?
So, I ask you, is the guy who reviews for CapAlert really concerned with protecting the children, or does he just feel guilty with wanting to see an R-rated movie without an actual reason?
I think it’s just a good excuse to watch R-rated movies. My mom gets newsletters from right-wing Christian groups that watch TV shows and movies and total up the bad words, sex scenes, and violence. It’s a bit ironic, that they have to watch these things so they can tell everyone else not to watch them. 'Cause most of the time it’s pretty obvious if a movie is going to contain any of those evil things, so it’s not even necessary to watch it to know that. :rolleyes:
From my years working in movie theatres, over ten years, some people are only concerned about one thing. Usually it’s sex. If a movie has no sex it is A-OK for children.
I did have one woman who didn’t want to hear cussing. Sex and violence are ok as long as they didn’t cuss. This was for herself, I dont’ think she had kids.
What did that guy say about PotC. Passion of the Christ not Pirates of the Carribbean.
Looks like he actually said “not for kids”. It got a 69 out of 100. (100 being the best score, 0 being the worst)
Sin City got a 0, which made me wonder why he even bothered reviewing it. It’s rated R, and its name is Sin City. That’s partly the reason why I opened this thread.
For comparison, he’s given Mary Poppins a 100. Many have joked about Mary’s use of witchcraft in the movie, and even taken the time to complain about it, because he’s docked many movies with the use of “witchcraft,” such as Harry Potter, and Lord of the Rings, but apparently Mary Poppins is more “innocent” or something, which makes it okay.
Because your morals might not be in accord with the movie rating system.
For example, and this is just an example, I don’t mind sex in movies and I certainly don’t mind foul language (it makes me feel at home!), but I intensely dislike graphic violence. Graphic violence isn’t against my morals, but I find it inappropriate for children (I don’t have any) in a way that sex and cussing are not.
More importantly, some movies, in my opinion, send really inappropriate messages about acceptable behavior or attitudes. It can be racial or otherwise prejudicial, or it can be about using people or mocking them or otherwise cruel behavior being portrayed as funny or desirable.
I’m not defending the site. I haven’t been. But there are more things that can be objectionable than just what the MPAA thinks of.
and goes on to list several movies. This supports the OP’s assertion that the reviewer just wants to see these R-rated flicks. If the funds are so limited, why on Earth would he spend time on ‘Sin City’, which I’m sure every member of his intended audience doesn’t need to hear from him to not to bring the kids, leaving “quintessential demons” unreviewed?
Either he wants to see these movies, or has a profound lack of common sense (also quite likely).
I emailed the guy asking about the fund situation (more politely than the way I phrased it above, of course), and he explained that he is fund-limited to seeing what his one local theater shows, because they let him see the flicks for free. So to see PG-13 movies not shown there, he has a long trip plus he has to pay admission.
Of course, this gives me the idea of making REVTIMalert, and trying to convince my local theaters that I’m deeply concerned over what kids see. Let me see the movie for free, I’m thinking of the children!
As a self-admitted conservative, I have to say that I don’t generally visit these sites. However, I can say that those I know who do generally are interested in whether a movie contains sex or sexual situations. Many of the folks (at least in my admittedly limited experience) will be reviewing movies that they want to rent. If a movie has language, there is a box that can filter the bad language out. If a movie has violence, no big deal (for many folks). But if it has sex, it is not something they want to see or that they want to show to their kids.
I generally preview movies myself (or with Mrs. NotCajun) before showing them to the four little HalfCajuns. I find that I don’t agree with many of the “morals” of many of these websites. For example, … details deleted for lack of relevance to the OP…
