From: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com (aml-list-digest) To: aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: aml-list-digest V1 #941 Reply-To: aml-list Sender: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-aml-list-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk aml-list-digest Tuesday, January 14 2003 Volume 01 : Number 941 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 22:58:46 -0700 From: Boyd Petersen Subject: Re: [AML] Boyd Jay PETERSEN, _Hugh Nibley: A Consecrated Life_ (Review) And the worst part is that the first born led to a second born which led to a third born and now a forth born. That's a lot of borns for a guy my age. But seriously, I just learned that the truck FINALLY arrived today with a huge pallet of Hugh to distribute to bookstores next week. The official release date is set for Wednesday, Jan 15, with a small soir=E9 to take place at Benchmark Books, 3269 S. Main Street, Suite 250 from 5 p.m. to 7 p.m. I'= d love to see some of you literary types stop by to mingle with all the book nerds and Nibleyophiles. - --Boyd - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 22:36:13 -0800 From: Kathy and Jerry Tyner Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies Answer: Midnight Cowboy, no goggling. Kathy Tyner Orange County, CA - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Slaven" > > There was actually an X-rated movie (which might now be rated at PG-13, > depending) that won the Best Picture Oscar once. Bonus points to anyone who > can name it without Googling for it. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 09 Jan 2003 23:53:46 -0800 From: "LauraMaery (Gold) Post" Subject: Re: [AML] Latest on My Memoir Thanks, Chris, for posting the cogent parts of your letter from the editor...It's fascinating. Chris writes: >It sounds like the main thing I need is some kind of organizing device >instead of a chronological narrative. I have a suggestion: FWIW, I agree with your editor about the need for a structure that transcends chronology. Strict chronology is meaningful to you, but to a reader it can become just so much yadda-yadda. At the same time, though, you need *some* chronology, or it becomes yadda-yadda disguised as a lecture. I commend to your reading the structure of the autobiographical "Life and Death in Shanghai," which seems to combine both chronology and topicality, or -- better yet -- Fox Butterfield's "All God's Children: The Bosket Family and the American Tradition of Violence." Both books are life-changing, and I recommend them to the entire list. Compelling biography, both. - --lauramaery - --------- OUR NEWEST WRITING PROJECT: Homeschooling Step by Step, Prima Publishing, Spring 2002. Everything you need to know about how to homeschool legally and effectively! How does your state rank? What's your child's learning style? What about college? Find teaching tips, teaching strategies, and more than 100 solutions to homeschooling's toughest problems! - --------- A message from LauraMaery (Gold) Post Web site: E-mail reply: - --------- . - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 03:18:21 -0700 From: "D. Michael Martindale" Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies Robert Slaven wrote: > There was actually an X-rated movie (which might now be rated at PG-13, > depending) that won the Best Picture Oscar once. Bonus points to anyone who > can name it without Googling for it. That one's easy. "Midnight Cowboy." > The MPAA didn't plan on the X rating becoming a synonym for porn movies, but > that's what ended up happening. Hence, 'X' became the kiss of death; by the > mid-70's (especially after the commercial success of Deep Throat), no > 'respectable' studio or director wanted their film to be X-rated. So they > made whatever cuts were necessary to squeeze into the R rating. > > In 1989 (?), a movie was made about Henry Miller, his wife June, and their > friend/lover Anais Nin called 'Henry and June'. The director refused to make > whatever cuts were required to make it R, and refused to have it rated X. The > result of the argument was the new 'NC-17' rating. It serves the purpose for > the MPAA that the original X rating was to have served. It was supposed to serve that purpose, but still has the same effect as the X rating used to. While NC-17 hasn't become the synonym for porn that X has, NC-17 is still considered the kiss of death for a film as is avoided like the plague (even the great Stanley Kubrik patched up his film "Eyes Wide Shut" with computerized silhouettes to avoid NC-17). NC-17 has become a sort of synonym for "artistic porn." - -- D. Michael Martindale dmichael@wwno.com ================================== Check out Worldsmiths, the new online LDS writers group, at http://www.wwno.com/worldsmiths Sponsored by Worlds Without Number http://www.wwno.com ================================== - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 19:30:21 +0900 From: "Kari Heber" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies Midnight Cowboy - 1969. Beat out Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, which is a more "enjoyable" film, if not a "better" one. Also, if memory serves, was actually re-rated to "R" the following year. - -Kari Heber - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 06:36:01 -0800 From: Jeffrey Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Announcing New LDS Publisher A new publisher? Most welcome news! I wish you, and those involved in the project, the best. And I hope we on this list can play a part in making this effort a success. Will Deseret Book be carrying your product? Have you contacted other retail outlets, like Seagull and Ensign Books? - ------------------ Jeffrey Needle jeff.needle@general.com or jeffneedle@tns.net - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 06:37:37 -0800 From: Jeffrey Needle Subject: Re: [AML] Judith FREEMAN, _Red Water_ (Review) Thank you for this review. I notice the domain name of your e-mail address is "aucegypt" -- are you really in Egypt? I wasn't aware we had list members in that part of the world. - ------------------ Jeffrey Needle jeff.needle@general.com or jeffneedle@tns.net - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 08:29:05 -0700 From: "Kim Madsen" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies > A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT - Rated R for language, mature themes, mild sexual > scene. >>Sorry - but this was a straight PG flick. Thanks to Ivan and others who corrected my mistake. This is what made me laugh about my own boo-boo...I don't look at ratings, so I generally don't know what a film is rated until someone else points it out to me. I assumed this film was an R, because, long ago when it was first released and I saw it, I shared some things about it that touched me in a ward testimony meeting (along with my testimony of course, don't want anyone to think I was giving a movie review...heheh). Anyway, afterwards, a sister in the ward who had a reputation for her more-than-run-of-the-mill righteousness came up to me and asked some serous questions about it, wondering if she should see it or not, but concerned about content. I figured if Sister X was asking it was probably R rated, because I didn't even consider she'd be that reluctant about a PG rated film. See, that old "assumption" thing getting me into trouble again... By the way, I don't know if she ever saw the movie or not. But a few months later she chastised me in front of a car full of Young Women (on an outing) for recommending the book SAINTS by Orson Scott Card. According to her it vilified the Prophet Joseph Smith, was carnal and evil. She hadn't read it, of course, but was so upset by it's existence she couldn't see any "good Mormon justifying reading *anything* by OSC. At the time I wondered where she got her information about the book, but didn't say anything, leaving it to the logic of those present to extrapolate from the conversation. I shared with the occupants of the car that I found the book "uplifting" and strengthening of my heritage, by helping me to understand and humanize what people went through in the early days of the church. I also said I though Card was a master storyteller and one of the finest I'd ever read. I remember clearly how she pressed her lips into a tight, hard line and didn't say anything after I spoke. It was tense for a bit there. It would be interesting to me to see how many of the six girls present went on to either read or stay away from Card's work based on the debate they heard that day. Those girls are in their early 20's, many married, some returned from missions. The sister in question passed away of cancer six years ago. What do I know...she's probably made it to a higher realm than I, because she definitely focused a lot of her energy on being good as she saw it. Her family struggled after her death, not only from that loss, but from open rebellion on the part of some of the children, who were adapting from a highly controlled (quarantined?) environment to a more open/chaotic one. I know this because my daughter was close friends with one of their daughters. But what newly-bereaved single parent family wouldn't have a difficult transition with a disabled child and four teens trying to fill in the holes left by mom? The lessons we learn from mortality. Life is risky, never safe. We should have joy in the journey and make room for other people's viewpoints by loving and respecting them, without sacrificing our own right to think and reason and learn. Sort of the message of A RIVER RUNS THROUGH IT. Kim Madsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 09:22:15 -0600 From: Ronn! Blankenship Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies At 08:29 PM 1/9/03 -0800, Robert Slaven wrote: >There was actually an X-rated movie (which might now be rated at PG-13, >depending) that won the Best Picture Oscar once. Bonus points to anyone who >can name it without Googling for it. Noonday Cowgirl - -- Ronn! :) Professional Smart-Aleck. Do Not Attempt. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 07:52:49 -0800 From: "Wes Rook" Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies : There was actually an X-rated movie (which might now be rated at PG-13, : depending) that won the Best Picture Oscar once. Bonus points to anyone who : can name it without Googling for it. : Midnight Cowboy with Jon Voit and Dustin Hoffman. This movie was shown on television a few years ago uncut and uncensored. It is interesting that a movie rated X when it came out can now be shown on television. hmmm.. B. Weston Rook Sacramento, CA - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 10:31:43 -0700 From: "Eric R. Samuelsen" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies I've said more than enough on this thread, but one last comment may be of = minimal value. What distresses me most about this supposed ban on R-rated = movies is the way it functions in our culture. I loathe the rating system = not because of what it is, but because of how it's perceived. =20 The term 'X-rated movie' describes something that does not exist, but = which is taken to mean as synonymous with porn. That's okay; I think = that's how the phrase 'x-rated movie' functions more broadly in American = culture, and so it's a valid usage. But that was not the intent of the = original X rating, which was originally meant to describe art films with = significant content that would make them entirely unsuitable for children. = Midnight Cowboy was one such film. A great film, and one which today = could very well be rated PG-13, but at the time, it was felt that it = simply wasn't appropriate for childen, even if accompanied by an adult. = The NC-17 rating of today essentially replaces the X rating of yesterday, = because the phrase 'x-rated movie' had become so corrupted it no longer = communicated what it was intended to communicate. But R-rated movie has come to mean much the same thing in Mormon as X = rated has come to mean in American. An R rating today is regarded in at = least some LDS cultural circles as synonymous with porn. The language = used in this very thread reflects that--'I don't want to fill my mind with = filth.' Filth. Perversion. Depravity. Those are the words at least = some folks are using to describe R rated films and the content therein. = =20 That's all nonsense, and that's what those of us who ignore the rating = system are responding to so strongly. I've seen the films in question. I = don't care what films are rated. They're not filth. They're not porn. = They're great films, uplifting, inspiring, of good report and praiseworthy.= I seek them out, and not just my aesthetic life, but also my spiritual = life is richer for it.=20 They're just not appropriate for small children. And that's why ultimately= this debate does not affect me. If you say to me "R rated movies will = negatively affect your relationship with the Spirit. They will fill your = mind with images incompatible with your testimony. They will destroy your = faith." Hey, that's not true. I know it isn't true, as surely as I know = that the Church is true, as surely as I know that gravity exists. I'm = also not speaking for anyone but myself in this regard, of course. =20 The rating system, if it functioned properly, would simply reflect that = simply reality; that some works of art are of great aesthetic, spiritual = and moral value, but are also not appropriate for small children. This is = just common sense, right? To say 'hey, this is a good thing, but you're = not old enough for it' is something I say to my kids every day of their = lives. I don't let my 9 year old drive. I think driving is good. She's = not old enough. I don't worry about having a double standard in this = regard, because she's a child and children need rules and boundaries and a = sense of appropriateness. I'm a big fan of Dr. Suess. But I pick up = other books for my own reading. =20 The rating system is and was always intended to be morally neutral. In = fact, morality is not one of the criterion used by the members of the = MPAA. If they rate a Harry Potter movie PG-13, and Stuart Little2 PG, it = doesn't mean that Stuart Little is slightly more moral than Harry Potter. = It just means that the Harry Potter movie is scarier, and little tiny kids = are probably going to be frightened by it. And if they rate The Pianist = R, it doesn't mean that it's that much more immoral than the other two = films; it just means that it's a Holocaust film and that children = shouldn't see it until they're old enough to understand and deal with the = horrors men can inflict on men. Morality and spirituality have nothing = whatsoever to do with the rating system, except to this limited degree: = the rating system presupposes a societal consensus that says that it is = immoral to take children to see things that they're not ready to handle. I loved both the Lord of the Rings movies. Loved 'em. I think they're = utterly brilliant movies. My nine-year old isn't old enough, in my = opinion, to see them. I think a PG-13 rating is appropriate for those = superb films, because, for children under 13, parents need to be very = careful, knowing their child, whether they should let them see it. On the = other hand, we've let my daughter watch the Fellowship DVD with us. With = us in the room, able to pause at any time and to answer any questions and = to cuddle her if needed, we think it's okay for her--she desperately = wanted to watch it, of course. =20 At that level, and at no other level, does morality enter into the rating = system. But it's this conflation of 'R-rating' with 'morally corrupt' = that I simply reject out of hand. There are lots of movies which I find = morally dubious. Their rating has nothing to do with it. =20 Eric Samuelsen - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 12:05:52 -0700 From: Barbara Hume Subject: Re: [AML] Latest on My Memoir At 11:18 AM 12/31/02 -0700, you wrote: >I thought I'd update AML-Listers on what's going on with the missionary >memoir proposal I've mentioned from time to time, and I need to ask for some >more advice. Regardless of whether my specific project appeals to you, this >situation should be interesting to anyone with any inclination toward >writing or reading material on Mormon themes aimed at the national audience. Thanks for this detailed explanation of what's going on. I was particularly interested in your perception that the memoir rather than the novel might sell best on the national market, at least at first. As you know, I'm working with an LDS woman on her book about what happened to her family when her first husband decided that polygamy was the right way to go. It's a fascinating story, but many marketing issues are puzzling us. I have your list of editorial people who responded well to you queries, and I appreciate more than you know. barbara hume - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:06:30 -0800 From: "LauraMaery (Gold) Post" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies All -- Not that it's authoritative [though the imprinteur of the Ensign certainly has weight, n'est-ce pas?], but anyone suggesting that R-rated movies are, by definition, evil might be interested in reading the April 1981 Ensign where Kieth Merrill says otherwise. (Kieth W. Merrill, =93I Have a Question,=94 Ensign, Apr. 1981, 24 =20 ) Likewise, Joseph Walker, national news placement specialist in the Church=92= s Public Communications Department and former film critic, suggests in a 1990 Ensign that the system is arbitrary and unreliable. (Joseph Walker, =93I Have a Question,=94 Ensign, Sept. 1990, 72 ) Further, under a January 2002 news article entitled "For the Strength of Youth Pamphlet=97Updated" is this gem: Q: How much does the new For the Strength of Youth deal with real-life issues and situations? ... As another example, under =93Entertainment and the Media=94 there is no specific mention of any rating system. This is not to be interpreted that the Church approves of R-rated or any other inappropriate movies. It is simply a recognition that there is increasingly great risk in tying ourselves to any rating system. Those that have been historically safe to use are not so anymore. Rating systems are constantly in a state of flux. Second, the rating system used in the United States does not apply to all parts of the world. As an international church, our people need to be taught principles they can apply no matter where they live. 'Zat pretty much sum it up? - --lauramaery - --------- OUR NEWEST WRITING PROJECT:=20 Homeschooling Step by Step, Prima Publishing, Spring 2002.=20 Everything you need to know about how to homeschool legally and effectively! How does your state rank? What's your child's learning style? What about college? Find teaching tips, teaching strategies, and more than 100 solutions to homeschooling's toughest problems! - --------- A message from LauraMaery (Gold) Post Web site: E-mail reply: - --------- . - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 11:18:14 -0800 From: "LauraMaery (Gold) Post" Subject: Re: [AML] Dutcher Movies News Eric writes about the casting of Legacy: >...When neither the director of the film nor the people who >wrote him his paycheck can "remember" his name, you have to wonder if >maybe the rumor is true. Anybody know anything for sure? Like the >actor's name, at least?) IMDB is normally a good source, but it's coming up with nada - --lauramaery "search me" gold - --------- OUR NEWEST WRITING PROJECT: Homeschooling Step by Step, Prima Publishing, Spring 2002. Everything you need to know about how to homeschool legally and effectively! How does your state rank? What's your child's learning style? What about college? Find teaching tips, teaching strategies, and more than 100 solutions to homeschooling's toughest problems! - --------- A message from LauraMaery (Gold) Post Web site: E-mail reply: - --------- . - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:48:08 -0600 From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies > At 02:14 PM 1/3/03, you wrote: > The Matrix (I heard, has been downgraded to PG-13) totally fascinated me. > It felt very spiritual. I still haven't quite placed why; something about > Neo's character struck me. Something like, we all have to figure out why > we're here. . . challenge what we are seeing, challenge what the world > really is, figure out why we are really here. Accepting the Gospel is like > taking the red pill. (Or was it blue? whichever one leads down Alice's > rabbit hole. . .) It also felt like PG-13. I heard it got an R rating only > because it came out right after the Columbine High School shootings, and > the ending includes a shootout with the main characters in black > trenchcoats. Can anyone back me up on that rumor? Not true. "The Matrix" was released March 31, 1999, a few weeks before Columbine. Even if it had come out just after, it would have long since been rated already; movies are submitted to the ratings board weeks or even months before they're released so that the rating can be included in the advertising. I've frequently heard the Mormon urban legend about video versions of "The Matrix" being downgraded to PG-13, but it's apparently just wishful thinking. Some have even claimed to own copies where the video box says PG-13, but I have yet to see one. I believe these people are like the ones who claim to have known people named "Lemonjello" and "Orangello," and until I see a birth certificate, I'm not buying it. Eric D. Snider - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:50:53 -0700 From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: Re: [AML] Dutcher Movies News > Still, I thought he did one of the best portrayals of 'Brother Joseph' > I've ever seen. Such an interesting contribution to Mormon Letters. > > Kathy Tyner > Orange County, CA Kathy, I hardly ever disagree with you. On this one, however, I do. I couldn't stand the guy who played Joseph Smith in _Legacy_. I hated his performance the first time I saw it, and hated it just as much again when I watched it with my family a few months ago. I think the film would have been far better served if the guy who played the narrator's love interest/husband had been cast as Joseph. Far more charisma and charm, and a more prophet-like sense of determination, integrity, and honor. From start to finish, every scene that had Joseph in it made me so irritated with his characterization. He missed Joseph's strength of will, and determination that went hand-in-hand with his playful and smiling nature. In short, there was nothing to back up the blue eyes and pseudo-charming smiles of the actor. It just didn't come across on the screen to me. I remember seeing it in the JSMB and thinking, "What is the big deal? This sucks." I still feel that way. There's a lot of great stuff in it--the costumes, scenery, wagons, other actors, but the actor that played Joseph just ruined it for me. I didn't know all this controversy about his personal life, though, until this thread. I wasn't too crazy about the girl/woman cast as the narrator/principle character either, fwiw. It just never felt like she really KNEW the story -- her acting just never once convinced me that any of it was *real*, like so many films do. Testaments was better, but still had some elements that had that same insincerity. I've only seen it the one time, though, so I can't be sure. I just know that at the end I loved seeing every last one of my kids in tears -- they actually felt something! So, for me, Testaments managed to do what it was designed to do. I guess Legacy did the same for many people, but ugh. I really dislike it. kathy fowkes - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:53:39 -0600 From: "Eric D. Snider" Subject: Re: [AML] Nedra Roney Profile Eric Samuelsen pointed out the highlights of the Utah Valley magazine feature on Nedra Roney. I would like to mention that the author, Jeanette W. Bennett, has done similarly glossy features on other local people. I fondly remember her interview with Robert Redford's son, Bilbo Redford (or something), which was as gushy and horrible as you can imagine. Also: "Nedra"? What kind of name is that? Eric D. Snider - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 15:57:30 -0700 From: "Kathy Fowkes" Subject: [AML] Reading Level of _Ender's Game_ Please, someone, tell me I'm not insane. My 9th grade son just came home and informed me that his school library has OSC's _Ender's Game_ listed at a 5th grade reading level. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read that book recently, and it has a very complex plot and at least a high school level vocabulary, doesn't it? Not to mention the plot itself containing some intense themes. I don't own this book, so those of you who are more informed on OSC's work, what is the national Reading Level rating for Ender's Game, and can you possibly give me some ammunition to get it upgraded to at least an 8th grade level at my kid's school? He wants to read it for an assignment, and sheesh! It would be great for him to read that! Really make him think and feel. Kathy Fowkes - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 14:59:57 -0800 From: "Susan Malmrose" Subject: Re: [AML] Clay MCCONKIE, _The Ten Lost Tribes_ (Review) Yes, thanks for this review. I almost overlooked it until Linda commented on it. I'm curious--did the author say anything about people who have been told in their patriarcal blessings that they are from a lost tribe? I ask because mine says I'm from the tribe of Dan, and I have yet to meet anyone else from a lost tribe--but I keep hearing rumors about various people here and there. I'd love to see some real numbers. And Linda: I love your theory about airplanes being the highway. Susan M - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 18:04:04 EST From: RichardDutcher@aol.com Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies Here's a fantastic, moral, uplifting, healing, beautiful, family R-rated movie: "One True Thing." It starred William Hurt, Meryl Streep, and Renee Zellwegger. It was directed by Carl Franklin. A truly wonderful film. Anyone looking for something "virtuous, lovely, of good report, or praiseworthy" would do well to start here. It is a movie that draws us closer together as human beings. I'm so exhausted by this R-rated debate. I'm sick of it. Some of the views expressed in this discussion absolutely terrify me. I fear that if Satan or someone influenced by him (Hitler, Stalin, etc.) were to attempt to take away my agency, there are some on this list who would cheerfully (and for my own good) help tie me down. Today I saw my one-millionth R-rated movie: Spike Lee's "The 25th Hour." I loved it. It had depth, intelligence, humanity. It was thoughtfully written, well-directed, and well-acted. I was emotionally moved at the end of the film and had to hold back the tears. Some day I hope to make as good of a movie. God was in this R-rated movie, as He was in "One True Thing," "Shawshank Redemption," "Schindler's List," "The Insider," et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. I'd write more, but I need to go get in line for "Adaptation." Whoops. It's R-rated. Maybe I should see "The Wild Thornberrys Movie" instead. I'm sure this PG movie will give me much more insight into the human condition. Richard Dutcher - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 16:19:37 -0700 From: "Thom Duncan" Subject: RE: [AML] R-Rated Movies >Most of these are old films, before I pretty much quit. (_A >Fish Called >Wanda_ changed my mind on seeing R films, just about permanently.) I >haven't seen any recently at all. Our Stake President has counseled >specifically that Pres. Benson's counsel does apply to adults >and that R >movies should not be watched. This happens all the time. Local leaders trying to do the prophets one better. President Benson makes his audience clear but the local SP reinterprets the audience as broader. I remember seeing this phenomenon within one week's time. I can't remember the details, but Elder Holland made a comment in Conference that young men should be required to wear white shirts to pass the sacrament but should be encouraged. The next week, our SP shared with us the new information that Elder Holland had said that all young men "should" wear white shirts. What does one do when faced with seemingly conflicting teachings? Linda has decided to "obey" her Stake President. (For me, the concept of "obeying" anyone but the Lord is foreign to the principle of obedience, imo, but I can support Linda in her decision.) Even then, it seems odd to me that one of an obedient mind whould chose to obey a local leader OVER the president of the Church, but that's just me. Personally, I chose to obey the principle and not the person, prophet or stake president. The "principle" I refer to is Article 13, where we are encouraged to seek after anything of good report. I read "anything" as, well, "anything" (I know it's a stretch, reading scripture for what it actually says rather than imposing my own interpretation on it.) "Good report" is, again, simply, "good report." Buz. Those in the know who say good things about something I'm interested in. If the majority of professional reviewers come down positive on an R-rated movie (even if Gene Shallit likes it), I'm more likely to see it. Similarly, if I find that most mechanics say a certain car is better then the others, I'm more likely to consider buying said car. Further deconstruction of Article 13 is enlightening. It says "If there is anything virtuous, lovely, OR of good report or praiseworthy, we see after these things." Notice it doesn't say "virtuous, lovely, AND of good report AND praiseworthy." I read this to mean that if a work of art has any of those virtues (though not necessarily all of them), it is worth seeking after. So I can allow myself the freedom of seeing a film that may not be virtuous, lovely, but which is of good report and not consider myself in violation of Article 13. To me, this would include even an NC-17 movie, were it of "good report" and "praiseworthy" as a work of art. Thom Duncan - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 17:21:16 -0700 From: "Scott Parkin" Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies Stephen Carter wondered: > This might seem to be a strange request to send to the AML list, but I've been > very intrigued by people saying that some of the most spiritual and affecting > movies they have ever seen are rated R. Is it too weird to ask just what some > of those movies are, and why they were so effective? Sadly, my movie watching has declined over the last few years (time and budget constraints) so I haven't seen quite a few of the excellent films out there. Here are a few films that I saw that I thought were quite worthwhile (in no particular order). * Boogie Nights. A dark and sad look into the life of a young man who finds both stardom and a warped sense of personal belonging (and even family) in the porn industry. The final scene of this film reveals a level of utter personal defeat by the main character that I found to be revealing and unfortunate. A difficult and powerful film for me. * Pulp Fiction. One of the most moral stories I've seen in recent years. The Samuel L. Jackson character is the only one who actually got the point that his violent and ugly lifestyle was not bringing him happiness, and that the miracle only had meaning if he followed up by walking away from his previous choices. * Seven. I actually hate the last five minutes of this film, and my disagreement with the filmmaker on how the story should have ended made this a strong thought exercise in both personal morality and the esthetics of storytelling. * War of the Roses. A primer of how not to live your life. Two unbelievably selfish people pursue their individual pleasure at the expense of the other--at first unintentionally, then with malice of forethought. A great example of a lousy example. * Jacob's Ladder. It came out about fifteen years ago and I can't really tell you what it was about, but I saw it many times and it has provoked more thought in me than any other film I saw during the 1980s. I can't even argue that the thought it provoked was intended by the author or the filmmaker. But it made me think about the purposes we create for our own lives and what the results of those choices can be. * A Clockwork Orange. Despite its political commentary I found this to be a challenging and worthwhile exploration of the ethics of weighing personal choice against the public good. Features the body of Darth Vader as the author's bodyguard. * Blade Runner. Asks some very difficult questions about self-determination, justifiable rage, unintended moral outcomes, and individual responsibility. The only movie that I actually liked Darryl Hannah in. I hated it the first five times I saw it, but kept coming back and now count it among my favorite films. * The Name of the Rose. A young priest during the Inquisition attempts to decide what he believes as he relates experiences featuring his intelligent but flawed mentor. I don't agree with some of the conclusions, but the questions were asked with sufficient style and power that they provoked a tremendous amount of introspection. - ---- Others have mentioned films that I quite enjoyed and feel personally expanded for having seen so I won't mention them again (Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Brazil [the original, long version; may not have been R-rated], and Glory leap to mind). Others have already commented on this, but if I had to pick a rating that I least trusted to offer thoughtful moral content I'd choose PG-13. At the same time that _Glory_ was showing with its R rating and its profoundly moral struggles a film called _Nuns on the Run_ with its PG-13 rating featured pointless nudity and violence and random acts of immorality glossed over with crass sight gags and a laugh track. If the sex or violence or immorality is emotionally disturbing the film earns an R rating; if the sex or violence or immorality is pointless and banal it gets a PG-13. Go figure. Some of the worst films I've ever seen have been rated R. Then again, some of the most objectionable films I've ever seen came in with G or PG ratings. There are a great many films (of all ratings) that wish I had not seen, but I have seen them and I've chosen to use even the ugly experiences to the best good I can. Sturgeon's Law in effect: 90% of everything is junk. My personal decision is that I'm willing to sift a fair amount of junk to find the occasional jewel. Maybe it's a poor method, but it's worked for me so far and I'm comfortable with it. If your opinion varies, I can only applaud the infinite diversity of the Human spirit and hope that everyone is at peace with their choices on the matter. I am. Scott Parkin - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2003 21:26:49 -0700 From: Clark Draney Subject: Re: [AML] R-Rated Movies D. Michael wrote: >Please, teach me correct PRINCIPLES and let me govern myself (which is >also good counsel from a prophet). That includes what movies I watch. I believe I generally agree with Michael on this point. Might it not also be true, however, that when prophets speak to the church as a whole they phrase things in terms that "the weakest of all" can abide. Surely some (many) of us can judge for ourselves what to watch based on correct principles and the guidance of the spirit, but there may also be some whose particular mortal circumstances make them vulnerable to precisely those types of things that often (not always) end up in R or similarly rated movies. The exploration of our individual circumstances is one of the core principles of what makes good literature, IMO. Huck Finn's decision to "go to hell then" for Jim's sake (deciding he _won't_ turn him over to the slave hunters and by so doing break the law and be damned---according to Aunt Polly) comes after a great deal of internal debate about Huck's own weaknesses and proclivities. His decision to "do right by doing wrong" may be representative of the choices we are sometimes faced with in deciding which mortal laws and rules we must abide. The larger question of whether such rule-breaking leads us to break eternal laws is much more serious and, to my mind, firmly settled. Clark D. - -- AML-List, a mailing list for the discussion of Mormon literature ------------------------------ End of aml-list-digest V1 #941 ******************************