HAS THE MPAA begun rating films based on religious content?
It depends on who you believe. The one thing everybody agrees on is that Facing the Giants, a church-made film about a Christian football coach who conquers the "giants" of fear and failure, deserved its PG rating. But was it for the adult themes of infertility and depression, as the Motion Picture Association of America claims, or was it for its evangelical Christian content, as its producer, Provident Films, maintains?
Provident spokesperson Kris Fuhr told Scripps Howard News Service that the MPAA used the word "proselytizing" in its explanation for giving the film--which contains no sex, violence, or profanity--a PG rating. "They decided that the movie was heavily laden with messages from one religion and that this might offend people from other religions," Fuhr said, adding: "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."
Christian bloggers went ballistic over the news, and the MPAA received 15,000 angry emails, along with a letter from Majority Whip Roy Blunt asking MPAA president Dan Glickman for an explanation. Pointing out that--according to a study by the Harvard School of Public Health--the MPAA's standards for onscreen sex and violence have weakened dramatically in the last decade, "This incident raises the disquieting possibility that MPAA considers exposure to Christian themes more dangerous for children than exposure to gratuitous sex and mindless violence," Blunt wrote.
In a letter of response, Glickman denied that
religion had anything to do with the PG rating, which is intended to warn parents that material in a film may be inappropriate for children. And MPAA ratings board chair Joan Graves told Daily Variety that promoters for Facing the Giants acknowledged that "they made a mistake" in believing that religious content affected the film's rating----a claim Provident Films head Ben Howard called "absolutely inaccurate." Provident Film's Nancy Lovell insists that it was the MPAA that changed its position, not Provident. "The first communication from the MPAA was that religion was a factor in the rating. Since then, the MPAA has revised those factors to no longer include religion," she told Daily Variety.
If the MPAA has indeed decided to rate films with an eye on religious content, it will be interesting to see how consistent those ratings will be. Will only Christian films be suspect, or will parents also be warned about films with Jewish or Buddhist or Muslim-friendly messages? What about films that attack or mock religious doctrine--such as The Da Vinci Code and The Last Temptation of Christ?
After all, film-goers have a right to know what they're exposing their children to. And God forbid that innocent moviegoers find themselves inadvertently supporting a religiously-themed film with intolerant truth claims. One only wishes that, given how many people rent older films, that the MPAA would warn viewers of potentially offensive religious themes they may encounter in these pictures.
For the religiously-sensitive viewer who doesn't want to wait, here are some updated warnings for some films of yesteryear:
The Sound of Music; 1965, Julie Andrews, Christopher Plummer. Winner of five Academy Awards, including Best Picture. Warning: Explicit depictions of Roman Catholic singing nuns, convent life, religious dialogue, and obedience to Christian God. For mature audiences only.
|
