Posted on 03/28/2007 7:55:02 AM PDT by SmithL
"How much pornographic imagery in a movie is "acceptable" for a Christian? In other words, at what point does a Christian make the difficult decision not to see a movie due to its graphic sexuality? Ever? Two sex scenes? Ten? Only one?"
Each Christian must make their own decision. My standard is any graphic sex and I won't see the movie. Do the images improve my relationship to God or hurt it? Do they help my marriage or hurt it?
Philippians 4:8 is a good standard:
8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things.
So has "300". but of course in general, critics are liberals and it flies in the face of their worldview. But if anyone doesn't think it's a good movie, then he shouls compare it with the old Richard Eagan movie of the '60s. Movies should move, and this one does.
LOL!
But it IS based on a true story.
I appreciate your sensitivity. It's uncommon to find Christians who choose not to see a movie because of some of its imagery.
I frankly *did* want to see 300, but after I learned what was in it, I had to make the difficult decision of staying home instead.
ultra extreme violence progressing from babies thrown off a cliff to children being toughened by being beaten, whipped, and slugged, wolf attacks young man, woman slapped, extreme battle violence with blood spurting and bodies cut, tremendous amount of body parts, nightmarish violence, grotesque creatures; extreme sex in orgy scene like out of a pornographic magazine, with homosexual, transgender and lesbian content, plus implied and depicted fornication; lots of upper female nudity, rear male nudity, upper male nudity; drinking; and, treachery, treason, bribery, cruelty.Thanks for the warning. I wasn't planning on seeing it anyway, but this is good to know.
It seems to me that it all started with the NY Times review of the movie. I read it on a Friday morning, and that weekend, many other reviewers seemed to be picking up their themes from it. The NYT reviewer was fixated on, and disturbed by, the possibility that the Spartans in the movie might be interpreted by some as American soldiers holding radical Islam at bay in the War on Terror.
Almost all reviews of big films like this are published the day the movie opens so it seemed to be a common interpretation arrived at individually.
Then that just confirms that most of the major movie reviewers are unrepentant liberals who want to bash America whenever they can.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! That is a Good one, ScreamingFist!! :D:D:D:D ....and completely true!!! :)
I went and saw the film this weekend and I just don’t understand all the commotion pro or con. From the hype I thought it must be the next Gladiator and boy, was I in for a let down. It’s a crappy movie, period.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.