Read Some Religious Reviews (June 30, 2005)

Lazy Panda said:
Being a Catholic, all what's left to say for me is that here we have one over-zealous bunch of fundamentalists. Too much sex with too many pepople is bad, as we all should know, but if it were for those nutcases, we should give up condums and anything that prevents unwanted results, and I am not solely referring to the chance of birth.
If that's what you think, then you're not a Catholic.

As for this website, I really don't see how anybody could have a problem with that review. Nobody's forcing you to read it.
 
Yeah, I see no problem with this in the least. Reviews are only useful if the person reviewing shares, at least to some degree, your world view. If your points of view are too seperate, or if you don't at least understand where they're coming from, the opinions of the reviewer won't tell you anything. This type of review caters to those who consider it important to look at different criteria when deciding on what movies to view than some of the people in this thread, but that doesn't make it wrong. I see nothing saying that they don't think movies like this should be made. They're just informing people so they can decide whether they want to see it or not.

People who don't want to see movies with sex, or implied sex, or magic, or anything else aren't necessarily bad oeople, just like people who want to see these types of movies aren't necessarily bad people.

People that these reviews cater to might not enjoy a movie with that type of content. This type of review just makes it so they can make an informed decision and not go to a movie they won't enjoy. You know, like those reviews you read that tell you the movie you thought was a lowbrow physical comedy flick is actually a sappy romantic comedy movie in disguise and oh god you don't want to see that, and your buddies will laugh at you if you suggest it.

I may sometimes enjoy a good movie with a bit of bloodshed and some random sex in it. Others might not. Who cares. Let them make informed decisions and decide for themselves.

edit: Also, the second review thought the cinematograph was poor. I thought it was pretty good :(
 
Wow! I think that's the first favorable review of the Wing Commander movie I've ever read!
CAP said:
"Wing Commander" (PG-13) -- in the shadows of "Lost in Space" and other sci-fi movies of late comes another relatively good sci-fi flick. The movie did have some neat graphics and some plot requiring a little thought to follow. And a great cast held back by a dry script.... one you might be glad you saw but would not go to the trouble to see it again.
That's more generous than alot of the reviews I've read even from WC fans. I happen to think it's worth seeing again though.

I think it was a good article to read for Christians or any parent who wouldn't want their child to see those types of movies. IMO the Wing Commander movie was one of the tamer movies you can see today- even though it does contain explicit language and some of the other things mentioned in the article.

I don't think there was any sin commited in the Wing Commander movie that isn't committed in the Bible. Of course we usually see the consequences of sin in the Bible, whereas here we don't see Maniac getting an STD or Rosie getting pregnant and Maniac not wanting to commit to raising the child- or worse, killing the fetus with an abortion. To be fair though, the Bible doesn't always show the consequences either, though it's known that God will eventually judge them when they die if not on Earth. Plus, one could argue that the graphic deaths were necessary to fight off the evil aliens.

From a Christian perspective it could be argued that SOME of these things aren't forbidden, but are rather things many parents Christian or non Christian wouldn't want their child to see. I can't really find fault with this first article.

Now onto the second....

I didn't agree as much with the second article. A year or two ago, I saw the end of The Last Starfighter and I think I'd rather watch Wing Commander. Although, I'm curious now to see The Last Starfighter again, since I haven't seen the complete movie since it was on my lunch box and thermos in grade school. Anyone else have The Last Starfighter lunchbox? I remember that parts of that were somewhat traumatic for me as a 5 or 6 yr. old, with the aliens invading (and I think killing people? I don't remember much other than I was really scared), but overall I enjoyed it and was glad I saw it.
 
I'm also a Catholic, and I think that the review goes a bit overboard with the whole sex and magic stuff. The reviewers are obviously very conservative, but calling the fundamentalists would be too much. I personally loved the movie and weren't offended in any way, but from the reviewer's point of view, it should've, as should've Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, Dungeons & Dragons, Batman Begins, James Bond, etc. etc.

It's true that Maniac and Rosie had premarital sex, but they're not Christians, so they can't be blamed for doing that: that's imposing beliefs and not respecting others'. Imagine a muslim review, complaining about the women not covered in veils! They recommended The Last Starfighter, and I've seen it. It's not very good, and aimed primarily for kids.
 
=Shadow= said:
It's true that Maniac and Rosie had premarital sex, but they're not Christians, so they can't be blamed for doing that: that's imposing beliefs and not respecting others'. Imagine a muslim review, complaining about the women not covered in veils! They recommended The Last Starfighter, and I've seen it. It's not very good, and aimed primarily for kids.
Wait, so you mean it's all right for Christians to watch porn, provided that the characters clearly establish that they are not Christian and therefore not bound by Christian morality? That's a pretty unique interpretation.

The point here, again, is that this review is written for people who are like the reviewers - that is, people who are bothered by on-screen sex. Similarly, if a Muslim was to write a review for other Muslims, there would certainly not be anything wrong with him noting that Rosie wasn't wearing a headscarf. This does not mean that he's imposing his beliefs on anyone - you either disagree or agree with the review, it's entirely up to you.

(oh, and what makes you think Maniac and Rosie aren't Christians? Their religion is never mentioned anywhere...)
 
Quarto said:
Wait, so you mean it's all right for Christians to watch porn, provided that the characters clearly establish that they are not Christian and therefore not bound by Christian morality?

Is it okay for christians to watch porn if the characters are married? :confused:
 
=Shadow= said:
It's true that Maniac and Rosie had premarital sex, but they're not Christians, so they can't be blamed for doing that: that's imposing beliefs and not respecting others'. Imagine a muslim review, complaining about the women not covered in veils!
That's an interesting point. To be fair to this reviewer though, don't you think it would be fair for a muslim site's review to warn it's readers that the women aren't covered in veils? If that was in a muslim review, I certainly wouldn't fault the reviewer for cautioning their muslim readers against it.

After all, this reviewer isn't "imposing his beliefs" on anyone in this article. He's merely cautioning Christians against certain aspects that in some cases MAY contradict the Christian faith and in other cases CERTAINLY do. You may be right though that he doesn't respect other's beliefs, but then again Jesus, the early church, and the Jews in the old testament often didn't respect certain beliefs of others either. Even non-christians usually don't respect the beliefs of others if they contradict their own in certain ways (beliefs of murderers, muslim extremists, etc.. to state a few obvious ones).

Just about everyone has opinions about things, and to truly respect everyone's beliefs could suggest you're not very convinced of your own. I have to be honest, I don't respect at all the beliefs of pro-abortionists, thieves, murderers, and adulterers. Is it wrong for me to not respect the beliefs of others? If you think so, then you're not respecting my beliefs :p .
 
Dyret said:
Is it okay for christians to watch porn if the characters are married? :confused:
That was my point - it's not okay for Christians to watch porn no matter who or what the characters are, because that's got nothing to do with it. It's not about who the people on the screen are - it's about who you are, and what you believe.
 
Quarto said:
(oh, and what makes you think Maniac and Rosie aren't Christians? Their religion is never mentioned anywhere...)

Does that anwer your question Delance? Or are we waiting for a punchline?
 
On the topic of religious reviews, I really like this site, from a Catholic point of view:

http://www.decentfilms.com/

No Wing Commander review tought. But check this:

"It’s tempting to call Batman Begins the Citizen Kane of super-hero movies; at any rate, it’s the closest thing so far."
 
Thanks for that link, Delance. Here's someone I can agree with, even if he makes a point to mark a movie I like with a Not Recommended/Unacceptable rating. There's logic, there's reason, there's someone who understands his own value system.
 
Quarto said:
Wait, so you mean it's all right for Christians to watch porn, provided that the characters clearly establish that they are not Christian and therefore not bound by Christian morality?
Heh, that's your particular interpretation of what I said. I never said that. Rosie and Maniac were NOT showed having sex (which otherwise would've been considered porn by anyone if it were explicit enough), it was just implied that they did. As for their religion, I just assumed. There's no indication they aren't Christian, but also nothing that indicates they are. Besides, if they were, they wouldn't have had sex in the first place. :p
 
=Shadow= said:
Heh, that's your particular interpretation of what I said. I never said that. Rosie and Maniac were NOT showed having sex (which otherwise would've been considered porn by anyone if it were explicit enough), it was just implied that they did.
Well, you seemed to be implying that Christians shouldn't have a problem with this scene, because to do so would mean imposing their morality on Maniac and Rosie. I was merely pointing out that this is not the case at all.
 
=Shadow= said:
There's no indication they aren't Christian, but also nothing that indicates they are. Besides, if they were, they wouldn't have had sex in the first place. :p

Having sex does not make anyone not be a Christian. Even wild space-combat sex.
 
criticalmass said:
Thanks for that link, Delance. Here's someone I can agree with, even if he makes a point to mark a movie I like with a Not Recommended/Unacceptable rating. There's logic, there's reason, there's someone who understands his own value system.

And how can you not like a guy who actually does his homework? I mean, for example, how many other Batman Begins reviews out there discuss (if in brief) the history of Batman as a work of fiction (from the original Bob Kane work, through the various animated and live-action shows, and even the Frank Miller graphic novels), not to mention knows (or knew how to look up) the correct pronounciation of Ra's al Ghul's name and what the name means in English?

(Granted, a majority of the reviewers don't have an entire web page all to themselves for each review, either.)

Anyway, from the few movie reviews I glanced at, while religion is mentioned where appropriate (Constantine and Gladiator were two of the represenative movies whose reviews I checked), he doesn't beat the reader about the head and shoulders over it. Mentioned in the brief summary of the questionable bits at the top, and where it's an issue in the plot part he's discussing, but doesn't try to pose everything in terms of religion/non-religion.
 
Back
Top