What is 'suitable for schools'? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 01:54 AM

Recently I made a short film to enter a short film festival a local high school was hosting. I was told to keep it PG and not have excessive violence or nudity. I followed this to the letter, going so far as to acquire a copy of the classification guidelines. Today was the day of the film festival, and it was very well received, receiving a massive number of votes. However, afterwards, a very angry history teacher came up to me and told me that my film was not suitable for school viewing and may disqualify it. The reason? It was implied that somebody said '****'. Naturally, I am annoyed.

My question is this: Was this fair? Is one instance of implied sexual content appropriate for a school? A high school?

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 01:57 AM

Nope. Protest it. Protest it to the death.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 02:08 AM

She was really strict last year. I'm half expecting her to ban us altogether if I try and argue.

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 02:13 AM

Is she the person in charge of the event, or is the school? I still think that if she tries to disqualify it you should first take it up with other teachers and the principal, and if really necessary keep on pushing and get public (or at least parental) attention on it. Cuz it's unjust, and it was totally within the bounds required. Start going through PG-rated films and shows to find equivalent and/or worse examples.

Glyphic

2010-09-10, 02:13 AM

She was really strict last year. I'm half expecting her to ban us altogether if I try and argue.

What exactly do you have to lose?

Fight, fight fight. Even if you have to bring it up to the school board or whomever.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 02:14 AM

No... That's not fair at all. You could passively argue it. That is, ask guided questions that point out how you followed the letter of what she said, that appear to be more of an information gathering to understand the rules better for future reference or curiosity. It's also good to understand her rules better in general anyway. Perhaps recommend, in the future, that she preview all entries to avoid such confusions, as you honestly did not expect anything in your film to be questionable or it wouldn't've been put in there.

The passive "information gather" that explains everything I did right in the process has always been my goto for unfair rulings. I've never needed a backup beyond it...

Also, congrats on making a very well received film.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 02:17 AM

What exactly do you have to lose?

Fight, fight fight. Even if you have to bring it up to the school board or whomever.

I can lose my chance to enter next year, I guess...
There are other film events, but this one gets a bigger audience.

Is she the person in charge of the event, or is the school? I still think that if she tries to disqualify it you should first take it up with other teachers and the principal, and if really necessary keep on pushing and get public (or at least parental) attention on it. Cuz it's unjust, and it was totally within the bounds required. Start going through PG-rated films and shows to find equivalent and/or worse examples.

She was organizing it. I'm not sure whether she has the power to do that or not. Most of the students support us, though.

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 02:26 AM

My recommendations, in approximately chronological order (partially assuming she'll try to cancel it next year, but not necessarily):
Negotiation with the teacher in question. Civil. Thaj's technique is reasonable.
Appeal to other teachers.
Appeal to principal.
Formal complaint to principal.
Petition among students.
Petition among parents.
Appeal to higher education authorities.
Public petition.
Approach the media.
Take it to court.

I shouldn't expect it would have to go past the formal complaint to the principal or at worst the parental petition... A real worry if it does :smalleek:

skywalker

2010-09-10, 02:47 AM

Start going through PG-rated films and shows to find equivalent and/or worse examples.

I don't know what those *'s are blocking out in there, but there are some words that are not allowed to be even implied in a PG film. Sexual content? Depends heavily on who is doing it and to what level it is implied. You're seeing fewer and fewer PG rated films lately.

Beyond that, however, I don't know how you can have a high school film festival and not have all the films be about sex. It's high school, what else do high schoolers think about? I never saw a student film made at my high school that didn't have serious sexual implications. Then again, we didn't have a "keep it PG" policy, either.

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 02:49 AM

The Simpsons is rated PG, and not infrequently has "bleeped" moments.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 03:11 AM

I don't know what those *'s are blocking out in there, but there are some words that are not allowed to be even implied in a PG film. Sexual content? Depends heavily on who is doing it and to what level it is implied. You're seeing fewer and fewer PG rated films lately.

It rhymes with 'tick'. Yes, it's that minor. Furthermore, it was not meant literally and only implied.

skywalker

2010-09-10, 03:17 AM

The Simpsons is rated PG, and not infrequently has "bleeped" moments.

The Simpsons is rated "TV-PG," which is a different rating from "PG" for movies.

It rhymes with 'tick'. Yes, it's that minor. Furthermore, it was not meant literally and only implied.

I don't know. I think it's minor, but now that I think about it, I've never seen or heard the word used in a PG film, and even the implication of that word would not have been looked well upon at my high school. *shrug*

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 03:23 AM

It's the same thing here *shrug*
And, more importantly, it wasn't actually said. I presume it was "bleeped" or mouthed or something, but that should cover it regardless.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 03:35 AM

... even the implication of that word would not have been looked well upon at my high school. *shrug*

That is the root of the problem, yes.

Caustic Soda

2010-09-10, 03:59 AM

The advice given so far seems good. there's one thing I don't understand though. High School students are age 15-18, right? Who would seriously consider them innocent enough to be 'damaged' by implied mild swears :smallconfused:?

Quincunx

2010-09-10, 04:49 AM

akma

2010-09-10, 04:58 AM

In my experience, when a student/many students complain about the teacher to the headmaster, the headmaster is always on the teacher side, no matter how wrong the teacher is.
I however would still give them the chance to act unreasonably. And don`t worry about being suspended from school - you are fighting for your values, think of the suspension as vacation from school.
Legal action sounds a bit exaggarated to me, unless trials go fast and cheap at wherever you are from.
And in the end I believe it will probably end in a compromise that you will change the text in which the word that rhymes with tick is implied.

And here is a little rant about censorship:
Censorship in general is ludicris. It`s completly inneffictive and very limiting. Unless you lock a child in a room and isolate it from the world, sooner or later he is going to hear curse words, and see sexual content, and see excesive violence. And it`s only going to bother him if he is exposed to the very extreme after being used to none. And sometimes it`s inconsistent - I saw on a few occasions characters on animation shows for children break their teeth, but somehow you can show that but not a little blood.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 05:58 AM

You're turning down free publicity? Are you mad? Just tell every one of your friends that Prickly_Teacher_01 wants to have your film censored. The story, and demand, will circulate through the school at light speed.

Indeed. I overheard them quoting the film while waiting for the bus and discussing a petition. It's generating memes, I think.

I'm sending a stern, yet civil, letter to the principal. I'm less aggravated now, so it doesn't matter to me so much anymore. I'd still like the prize, though, and the chance to enter again later.

And if it doesn't work, I'll just make better films and go to a larger scale.

Serpentine

2010-09-10, 06:02 AM

That's the way. Not "Priiiiiincipal, teacher's being meeeeaaaaaan." Sober, sensible, mature, etc. Maybe get your parents to review it, too.

prufock

2010-09-10, 08:20 AM

"Suitable for schools" is not the issue. The issue is the terms and conditions of the contest. You were told that the material had to be PG. You can say the F word in a movie up to 4 times (in a non-sexual context) before a film gets slapped with the PG-13 rating. Mild language and discreet sexual references are in the realm of PG. Many PG movies contain anatomical references. If you want to find examples to back up your case, www.kids-in-mind.com is a good resource (search by rating, PG, 3-8 in language).

skywalker

2010-09-10, 12:44 PM

It's the same thing here *shrug*
And, more importantly, it wasn't actually said. I presume it was "bleeped" or mouthed or something, but that should cover it regardless.

It wouldn't have at my high school. A reference was made in a play to "a sporting goods store for which the name sign has curiously been blacked out..." and that was considered edgy. We were allowed very, very un-PG topics and themes (up to and probably including some R themes), but very little to no leniency on the subject of sex and graphic violence.

"Suitable for schools" is not the issue. The issue is the terms and conditions of the contest. You were told that the material had to be PG. You can say the F word in a movie up to 4 times (in a non-sexual context) before a film gets slapped with the PG-13 rating. Mild language and discreet sexual references are in the realm of PG. Many PG movies contain anatomical references. If you want to find examples to back up your case, www.kids-in-mind.com is a good resource (search by rating, PG, 3-8 in language).

What rating system do you go by?

In USA, 2 "f-words," and you've got an automatic R rating, with no regard to the context.

Coidzor

2010-09-10, 12:54 PM

Ahh, critically undersexed teachers. Where would life be without them?

prufock

2010-09-10, 01:08 PM

What rating system do you go by?

In USA, 2 "f-words," and you've got an automatic R rating, with no regard to the context.

You're right, I was thinking of the PG-13 to R cutoff. Is it really 2? I could have sworn it was 4. The rest of my reply I believe is correct, though.

snoopy13a

2010-09-10, 01:09 PM

Since she complained after everyone watched the movie, just ignore her. You already screened the film, everyone watched it and many liked it. Who cares if she didn't like it. She can't do anything about it now :smallsmile:

Mauve Shirt

2010-09-10, 01:13 PM

Can't they raise the age to PG-13? Or do 12-year-olds attend this high school?

Jack Squat

2010-09-10, 01:13 PM

What rating system do you go by?

In USA, 2 "f-words," and you've got an automatic R rating, with no regard to the context.

Spaceballs drops the F-bomb twice, and has other instances of cursing. It's PG.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 01:15 PM

"a sporting goods store for which the name sign has curiously been blacked out..."

That's not even a bad word in that usage... It's just short for Richard. Just like "Bob" is short for "Robert".

Censorship is stupid. A few words should honestly not effect a movie's rating in my opinion. Nor should nudity or sex. I'd go as far as to make bleeps, blurs and forum filters illegal. Violence and horror are the only only real reasons I see to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to see something because they're too young.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-10, 01:17 PM

I don't know. I think it's minor, but now that I think about it, I've never seen or heard the word used in a PG film, and even the implication of that word would not have been looked well upon at my high school. *shrug*

It's not recent but it was used in Ghostbusters and that was rated PG.

Heck, look at the top 11 naughtiest moments in Animaniacs on thatguywiththeglasses.com. That had quite a few sexual references and was a kid's show.

Censorship is stupid. A few words should honestly not effect a movie's rating in my opinion. Nor should nudity or sex. I'd go as far as to make bleeps, blurs and forum filters illegal. Violence and horror are the only only real reasons I see to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to see something because they're too young.

Maybe this is just me but I hate Nudity in films to the point where if a girl even has bare breasts I won't watch it. I'm straight, I just don't find nudity of any sort appealing. Heck, a bare bottom pushes the line for me. If they want to change the rating system to make that allowed in kid's films fine but I want to know beforehand what I'm getting into.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 01:23 PM

Maybe this is just me but I hate Nudity in films to the point where if a girl even has bare breasts I won't watch it. I'm straight, I just don't find nudity of any sort appealing.

Nudity doesn't have to be sexual, you know...

Mystic Muse

2010-09-10, 01:24 PM

Nudity doesn't have to be sexual, you know...

Doesn't matter. If it ever goes past a bare bottom for any reason I won't watch the movie.

WarKitty

2010-09-10, 01:45 PM

Nudity doesn't have to be sexual, you know...

Doesn't have to be. 99% of the time I've seen nudity in films, the sole reason is "hey we thought some gratuitous boobies would boost our ratings!"

snoopy13a

2010-09-10, 01:50 PM

Censorship is stupid. A few words should honestly not effect a movie's rating in my opinion. Nor should nudity or sex. I'd go as far as to make bleeps, blurs and forum filters illegal. Violence and horror are the only only real reasons I see to say that someone shouldn't be allowed to see something because they're too young.

Personally, I wouldn't want my (non-existant) five year old child watching movies with adult language, nudity, or sex. That's why the ratings exist.

What is funny is that filmmakers will actually add profanities to bump up ratings in some circumstances. For example, a scene with a profanity was thrown into the Academy-award winning Chariots of Fire so that it would not recieve a "G" rating.

VanBuren

2010-09-10, 01:52 PM

Spaceballs drops the F-bomb twice, and has other instances of cursing. It's PG.

I've seen that before with PG movies from the 80s. I'm guessing that the system has tightened up a bit since then.

Jack Squat

2010-09-10, 02:08 PM

I've seen that before with PG movies from the 80s. I'm guessing that the system has tightened up a bit since then.

Actually, there's accusations of the reverse. From Wikipedia:

Although there has always been concern about the content of films,[40] the MPAA has, in recent years, been accused of a "ratings creep", whereby the films that fall into today's ratings categories now contain more objectionable material than those that appeared in the same categories two decades earlier.[41] A study put forward by the Harvard School of Public Health in 2004 concluded that there had been a significant increase in the level of profanity, sex and violence in films released between 1992 and 2003.[42] Kimberly Thompson, director of the study, stated: "The findings demonstrate that ratings creep has occurred over the last decade and that today’s movies contain significantly more violence, sex, and profanity on average than movies of the same rating a decade ago."[43]

What makes sense with these older films is that even with the profanity and violence, there wasn't enough wrong with them to make the jump from PG to R. PG-13 was introduced in July 1984, and solved a lot of this. The problem with Spaceballs is that it was released in June 1987.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 02:17 PM

Personally, I wouldn't want my (non-existant) five year old child watching movies with adult language, nudity, or sex. That's why the ratings exist.

Why? It's just words and nature... We're born naked. Love is generally a good thing.

I have trouble understanding a lot of society's illogical taboos. When I eventually have kids, I won't shield them from things that are in no way harmful or damaging. That's just extra work for no reason.

Marnath

2010-09-10, 03:15 PM

This teacher has a problem with the shortening of Richard? I suppose she's never walked the hallways of the school? Seriously, I've heard countless kids in a way lower grade than that who could make a sailor blush. Censorship in schools is sadly misplaced naivete, because anyone who's going to have sex or be vulgar has been doing it for a while by the time high school rolls around, and even if they weren't.... you have no authority over these kids when they leave the school grounds, and you have no ability to make them care about your rules.

Syka

2010-09-10, 03:19 PM

Interestingly, in a fair few European countries (I want to name Sweden as one of them...I know it was definitely a Scandinavian country) censor violence far more than sexuality and nudity.

It's all about cultural mores. What's cool in one cultural, isn't in another. The only REAL problem I have with sexual content in movies is most (I think it was like 84% or some such) don't show any possible consequences of sex (pregnancy, STI's, breaking up, etc). Most don't even address the issue of protection in any manner, or explicitly have them NOT using protection, which is why the above bugs me.

But yeah, I'm pretty cool with stuff. My mom didn't censor much, but we also always talked about stuff. Probably why I get uncomfortable about censoring stuff. Why not, ya know, make sure your kids are watching age appropriate stuff, and talk to them about other things? I mean, I read Mists of Avalon when I was...11(?), which is very heavy on sexual content. People were shocked my mom let me. But we'd had talks about it and all, so it wasn't an issue.

Marnath

2010-09-10, 03:26 PM

Another thing to consider is that with kids, if they're not mature enough to handle adult content, the references will probably go right over their heads anyway assuming it's not explicit.

RandomNPC

2010-09-10, 04:52 PM

duno about the school thing, as I don't go to your school, but I'd wait to see if it gets banned, THEN raise a stink.

As for censorship, I went to public school, and I'm fine.

Video games on the other hand. I got Resident Evil 2 after playing it at a friends house, and when the "Excessive violence" warning came up my dad started talking to me about shooting people, what's real and what's not, those kinds of things. I told him:
"Dad, it's a videogame about shooting zombies. Show me a real world zombie, prove to me it's a zombie, and I'll shoot it. The kids at school? Not Zombies."

That got me a few more freedoms on censored material, and is something I thought was just common sense.

Marnath

2010-09-10, 05:02 PM

VanBuren

2010-09-10, 05:07 PM

Common sense is not politically correct anymore. These days you're expected to protect people from any possible bad thing instead of relying on their intelligence and ability to know that, say, sticking your hand into a running lawnmower is bad.

"Common sense" is often not worth the letters used to write it out, but that's neither here nor there. :smallsigh:

EDIT: Let me eat my own words here. "common sense" as defined by the "sense" held in "common" by society is useless.

"Common Sense" as in "sound judgement in practical matters" which is the more technically correct meaning is very valuable, but arguable uncommon in society. :smalltongue:

Daze

2010-09-10, 05:08 PM

Doesn't matter. If it ever goes past a bare bottom for any reason I won't watch the movie.

My friend, I can think of no less then 50 great movies you're missing out on based on that standard.

Marnath

2010-09-10, 05:15 PM

My friend, I can think of no less then 50 great movies you're missing out on based on that standard.

I can relate to missing out on possibly good movies to maintain my standards. I don't watch anything that has adam sandler or ben stiller in it, because I automatically know it will be garbage. Dudes just aren't funny.

Daze

2010-09-10, 05:18 PM

I can relate to missing out on possibly good movies to maintain my standards. I don't watch anything that has adam sandler or ben stiller in it, because I automatically know it will be garbage. Dudes just aren't funny.

LOL. Those are good standards actually.
Ben Stiller OCCASIONALLY gets a chuckle, but Adam Sandler's talent level is in serious question.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-10, 06:36 PM

My friend, I can think of no less then 50 great movies you're missing out on based on that standard.

Such as?

The only ones I can think of are Die hard (I watched that all the way through anyway though) and "They call me Mr. Tibbs" and I don't know if that's good anyway.

AtopTheMountain

2010-09-10, 06:38 PM

Such as?

The only ones I can think of are Die hard (I watched that all the way through anyway though) and "They call me Mr. Tibbs" and I don't know if that's good anyway.

Titanic? :smalltongue:

Coidzor

2010-09-10, 06:40 PM

It's all about cultural mores. What's cool in one cultural, isn't in another. The only REAL problem I have with sexual content in movies is most (I think it was like 84% or some such) don't show any possible consequences of sex (pregnancy, STI's, breaking up, etc).

Y'know, I've never really gotten the whole "Sex leads to breakups" thing. I can see it as a contributing factor, certainly, but somehow I find it straining my suspension of disbelief as a sole cause.

Titanic? :smalltongue:

Avatar? (Oh wait.... ;P)

Common sense is not politically correct anymore. These days you're expected to protect people from any possible bad thing instead of relying on their intelligence and ability to know that, say, sticking your hand into a running lawnmower is bad.

Nor is it, especially common.

Syka

2010-09-10, 06:45 PM

No, not that it leads to break ups. But the emotional effects that breaking up with someone you've been intimate with can have. Not that it WILL, but it definitely CAN. Really, though, any sort of intimacy (emotional or physical, not necessarily of the traditional sex kind) can result in the same thing. It's just generally ignored when sex happens, though, unless they want one of the characters to go totally nutso.

Sorry for lack of clarity.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 06:48 PM

Y'know, I've never really gotten the whole "Sex leads to breakups" thing. I can see it as a contributing factor, certainly, but somehow I find it straining my suspension of disbelief as a sole cause.

Sex can lead to breakups. This is because the less sex a person has had previously, the more likely there is to be a major change in their personality afterward. A common effect is to get very clingy, but that's not the only one. It can also do the opposite, drive a person to be more likely to cheat. Because of this possible change, the two people might no longer be compatible. Whether or not people get married before they first have sex doesn't effect whether or not they remain compatible after sex, it only effects divorce rates. (This is why I'm pro-premarital sex (with protection, of course).)

I think if sex was a more open and socially acceptable topic, this effect would be greatly decreased.

Coidzor

2010-09-10, 06:52 PM

That sounds more like a weak-will leading to an addiction or inability to cope with emotions due to being sheltered from all similar feelings and thus stunted in one's development as a person.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-10, 06:59 PM

Titanic? :smalltongue:

I despise tragedies and am not a big fan of romances.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 07:01 PM

That sounds more like a weak-will leading to an addiction or inability to cope with emotions due to being sheltered from all similar feelings and thus stunted in one's development as a person.

That's exactly what I think it is. Happens to more than half of people when they lose their virginity too, which I think is because of how society treats the subjects not just of sex, but of affection in general. Sometimes even just general friendliness...

742

2010-09-10, 08:45 PM

i think censorship needs to be down to personal taste, tell me whats in the movie-i find bland "family-oriented" lowest common denominator crap with no imagination originality style or subtlety absolutely inexcusable, so i avoid movies involving certain people (sandler, stiller except for "zoolander", speilberg) others may not have that problem, maybe theyre prone to sezures so need to avoid too many flashing lights, or cant stand harsh criticism of a favored idealogy. all things people should have a choice on, but an artist should never be forced to comply with any of these things for any reason other than technical or budgetary limitations, and even those are sad.

and why do people assume that a violent film will make people violent? i often find that particularly horrific moments in media make me more rainbows-and-butterflies* for a while. a good torture scene (with context) or particularly well written death can turn me off of violent responses for a while.

edit: didnt bladerunner and the matrix both have a little bit of nudity in them? i tend to not notice it unless its the obviously classless type used to appeal to the idiots so i could be wrong.

*well closer to at least.

Dubious Pie

2010-09-10, 08:51 PM

Matrix: No, only the gawd-awful sequels.

742

2010-09-10, 08:56 PM

Matrix: No, only the gawd-awful sequels.

okay, so the scene where neo's physical body wakes up for the first time doesnt count? what counts as nudity always confuses me; it seems too arbitrary.

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 09:00 PM

okay, so the scene where neo's physical body wakes up for the first time doesnt count? what counts as nudity always confuses me; it seems too arbitrary.

This is a perfect example of nudity used in a completely non-sexual context!

Mathis

2010-09-10, 09:13 PM

I despise tragedies and am not a big fan of romances.

Then you should try The Last of the Mohicans. It's a romance, but 90% of the people who watch it never even understands that and take it as an action movie with a romantic sub-plot so I think you might like it anyway. (NOTE: that number is completely based on the people I know personally and should not be taken seriously.)

However it does have VAST quantities of nudity. I mean, the native americans there dont even wear shirts man. So one who watches it will be exposed to the naked upper bodies of men, something that oddly enough seems perfectly acceptable in many movies compared to the female counterpart. I hope you do take that statement with a pinch of salt as I was trying to be ironic/sarcastic.

And what is acceptable in schools these days does vary very from culture to culture as Syka has already mentioned with her mention of Swedish movies. I grew up watching alot of Scandinavian childrens shows and movies, and they have a fair amount of nudity in them. Especially is this notable in the movie "Ronja Røverdatter" (Ronja Robbersdaughter) where Ronja, the female protagonist is dancing around in a green forest with male friend of hers. They are about 8 years old and it was perfectly acceptable for them to be naked together on screen. I can also confirm that there is more cursing in Scandinavian movies for children than in the english ones I've seen, but not notably more so. And that violence is censored more harshly than nudity and cursing.

And Im afraid I can't really offer much of a constructive comment on your movie and the cursing and the teachers objection to this without having seen the film in it's proper context myself.

Fiery Diamond

2010-09-10, 09:23 PM

It's not recent but it was used in Ghostbusters and that was rated PG.

Heck, look at the top 11 naughtiest moments in Animaniacs on thatguywiththeglasses.com. That had quite a few sexual references and was a kid's show.

Maybe this is just me but I hate Nudity in films to the point where if a girl even has bare breasts I won't watch it. I'm straight, I just don't find nudity of any sort appealing. Heck, a bare bottom pushes the line for me. If they want to change the rating system to make that allowed in kid's films fine but I want to know beforehand what I'm getting into.

It's not just you. I'm the same way.

Also, I have to say that I'm thankful for people saying "I don't understand why you need to bother with censorship of X." At least that acknowledges that you aren't omniscient. Those saying "censorship" or "censorship of X" "is stupid" or similar are ... well, that attitude upsets me. To put it mildly. Certainly I agree there are cases (and plenty of them) of unneeded and ludicrous censorship, but just as you have the right to watch/hear certain things, others have the right to safeguard those under their care (and themselves, if they so choose) from having to watch/hear certain things. Live with it and stop acting like you know best.

Coidzor

2010-09-10, 10:42 PM

It's not just you. I'm the same way.

Also, I have to say that I'm thankful for people saying "I don't understand why you need to bother with censorship of X." At least that acknowledges that you aren't omniscient. Those saying "censorship" or "censorship of X" "is stupid" or similar are ... well, that attitude upsets me. To put it mildly. Certainly I agree there are cases (and plenty of them) of unneeded and ludicrous censorship, but just as you have the right to watch/hear certain things, others have the right to safeguard those under their care (and themselves, if they so choose) from having to watch/hear certain things. Live with it and stop acting like you know best.

Is more like the difference between censorship and producing things in good taste for a target audience.

Bleeping out the cursewords from a song that is fundamentally about the glorification of the objectification of women and the acquiring of wealth through illicit means out of the belief that this will somehow make it appropriate for children is stupid.

Just as producing something as sexual as Sonichu and claiming it is for children is not only stupid but also deeply disturbing and indicative of something not right with the creator.

Reshbj

2010-09-10, 11:09 PM

Thank you all, but it worked.
We got off with a strong warning.
We won the prize.
'X Is Suitable For High School Audiences' has achieved meme level within the school.

:smallsmile:

Thajocoth

2010-09-10, 11:27 PM

Thank you all, but it worked.
We got off with a strong warning.
We won the prize.
'X Is Suitable For High School Audiences' has achieved meme level within the school.

:smallsmile:

Congratulations of the big win!

Knaight

2010-09-11, 12:43 AM

Glad to see you got it through. Clearly your highschool has some redeeming qualities in this regard, there are some that don't.* The restriction is still absurd, particularly as one can sneak far worse stuff past the radar without actually using terminology. Cest la vie in any case.

*My elementary school wouldn't allow me to put the title of a book on a book poster. Said title was "Journey to the valley of the dead", and apparently kindergartners should never see the term "dead". And this is less absurd than several other schools around here.

Serpentine

2010-09-11, 12:43 AM

Hurrah! :smallbiggrin:
I'm pretty fine with film ratings - and I do not think that counts as censorship. Refusing to allow a film to be shown is censorship. Blotting out parts that the creators intended to be seen is censorship. Refusing to grant video games an R18+ rating thereby making them illegal to sell is censorship. Labelling films and games to approximately appropriate age groups and content so that people can have a good idea what they're getting and whether they want to show it to their family, is not censorship.
Such as?The Crying Game.
Clockwork Orange
Requiem For A Dream
Watchmen
Almost Famous
American Beauty
American Pie
The Piano
Apocalypse Now
Being John Malcovich
Beowulf
Terminator

Y'know, just use this (http://www.movieswithnudity.com/movieguide/B) (is a guide to avoiding nudity in movies, does not have any comments on quality of the films listed).

Reshbj

2010-09-11, 01:19 AM

Ah, I see why everyone's been phrasing things weird. It's not my school.

max-is-working

2010-09-11, 02:54 AM

That history teacher sounds like somebody who would whitewash The Color Purple or insist that Schindler's List should never be shown in schools.

I bet she's not a very intelligent teacher; probably one of those narrow-minded paint-by-number, teach-by-rote-method people. Ugh. I see the type too often in my line of work. So many teachers have tiny minds with obsolete perspectives trying their best to turn back the hands of time and raise today's youth to be as dead-end as they are. Hmph.

Rawhide

2010-09-11, 03:49 AM

I haven't read the whole thread (though I see that it has not been disqualified, yay!), but there is one thing you may not have thought of.

Have you considered submitting the short film to the classification review board to get an official rating? You could then use this to demonstrate that the film fell within the original entry guidelines as well as falling within the allowable guidelines for showing in schools. Even now that it has not been disqualified, you may want to consider this.

Knaight

2010-09-11, 11:15 AM

Ah, I see why everyone's been phrasing things weird. It's not my school.

Nope. Its lots of schools.

Gwyn chan 'r Gwyll

2010-09-11, 11:25 AM

My school is pretty chill. My film teacher and a friend and I were talking about the friends one-year photo project. (One photo for every day of the school year). His photo's are always far on the risque side. His first photo is a photo of him posing naked, with a happy face over his junk. His previous photos last year included him manacled to a bed with a girl lying next to him, asleep and smiling.

This teacher is awesome though.

Thajocoth

2010-09-11, 02:07 PM

I remember this cross-school art contest my computer graphics class had us enter back in Mount Sinai High School (it's on Long Island, in Mount Sinai). We were all supposed to find other people's art online, modify it in a cheap Photoshop-knockoff, and enter it in the contest. Some of the students in my class nearly won awards with their stolen artwork, coming as close as 2nd place for some things.

I refused to do that, so I brought in 3D renders I had made at home in Macromedia Extreme 3D 2. I had to have one modified picture (because our teacher said so), so I chose to edit a photo of a national monument, Mount Rushmore. I didn't like pasting my fingers to President Washington's head, but it was less bad than downright plagiarism. Some of the other students in my class claimed to have used Maya or Max. I did mention the complete fraudulence to a few of the people who came by, if they asked about a classmate's work, but considering that no one was disqualified, I don't think anyone took it seriously.

Nomrom

2010-09-11, 11:48 PM

Knaight

2010-09-12, 12:33 AM

So someone who supports censorship is inherently less intelligent? You might want to think about that one some more.

Considering that this case is about some mistaken belief in innocence in high school kids, it might be a bit of an indicator. Some small correlation with a bunch of more important facts to be sure, but quite possibly a correlation nonetheless.

Nomrom

2010-09-12, 01:15 AM

Considering that this case is about some mistaken belief in innocence in high school kids, it might be a bit of an indicator. Some small correlation with a bunch of more important facts to be sure, but quite possibly a correlation nonetheless.

Just because kids in high schools might be having sex or doing drugs doesn't mean these things are appropriate subject matters for a high school class. I know exactly what high schoolers are getting up to do, but I still support censorship in matters such as these. The teacher in this case might have gone a little far, since nothing was actually said, just implied, but I don't think you could make a correlation between censorship and intelligence level.

Moff Chumley

2010-09-12, 01:23 AM

Knaight

2010-09-12, 01:41 AM

Just because kids in high schools might be having sex or doing drugs doesn't mean these things are appropriate subject matters for a high school class. I know exactly what high schoolers are getting up to do, but I still support censorship in matters such as these. The teacher in this case might have gone a little far, since nothing was actually said, just implied, but I don't think you could make a correlation between censorship and intelligence level.
Nothing was said, they were reneging on a previous deal (PG), and the lack of intelligence hypothesis is just one being thrown around, with recognition that there are other valid ones. Its not as if there aren't some extremely stupid teachers after all.

Vaynor

2010-09-12, 02:54 AM

Spaceballs drops the F-bomb twice, and has other instances of cursing. It's PG.

That was before the MPAA implemented the PG-13 rating, which was first adopted in 1984. Movies prior to that were either G, PG, R, or X (now it's G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17).

I don't think citing a 30 year old rating system is going to fly as an argument.

Rawhide

2010-09-12, 02:59 AM

That was before the MPAA implemented the PG-13 rating, which was first adopted in 1984. Movies prior to that were either G, PG, R, or X (now it's G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17).

I don't think citing a 30 year old rating system is going to fly as an argument.

Except Spaceballs was released in 1987.

Vaynor

2010-09-12, 03:15 AM

I'll shut up now.

Serpentine

2010-09-12, 05:50 AM

Man. I like the Australian rating system much better. There's: "exempt" or something like that, for documentaries and the like; C (?) for "child" (or something like that) meant for very small children; G for General, suitable for all ages; PG for Parental Guidance For Young (<15ish) Viewers; M for Recommended For Mature (15+) Audiences (I think younger people are allowed in at the cinema); MA15+ for Mature Audiences Only (kids not allowed, or only when accompanied by a parent); and R18+ for Restricted to Adult Audiences (children never allowed in). Oh, and then X etc., but that's more niche.
That was pretty dodgy, so here's what it says on the DVDs with those ratings: R18+ Restricted: Restricted to 18 and over; MA15+ Restricted: Not suitable for people under 15. Under 15s must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian; M: Recommended for mature audiences; PG: Parental guidance recommended for persons under 15 years; G: General.*

*Kill Bill Volume 1, Kill Bill Volume 2, Batman Begins, Spaceballs and 2001: A Space Odyssey, respectively, if you're interested.

InaVegt

2010-09-12, 07:21 AM

we just have AL, MG-6, 12+, 16+, and 18+ (pr0n)

V'icternus

2010-09-12, 07:47 AM

Man. I like the Australian rating system much better. There's: "exempt" or something like that, for documentaries and the like; C (?) for "child" (or something like that) meant for very small children; G for General, suitable for all ages; PG for Parental Guidance For Young (<15ish) Viewers; M for Recommended For Mature (15+) Audiences (I think younger people are allowed in at the cinema); MA15+ for Mature Audiences Only (kids not allowed, or only when accompanied by a parent); and R18+ for Restricted to Adult Audiences (children never allowed in). Oh, and then X etc., but that's more niche.

I was required to check recently, and it's actually, in this state anyway, illegal in Australia to view an MA movie if you're under 15, or allow someone under 15 to see an MA movie, with or without an adult with them.

But yes, our rating system is dah bomb. Except for games.
For now.

Serpentine

2010-09-12, 08:04 AM

Considering it says on the classification, "Under 15s must be accompanied by a parent or adult guardian", I'd say that doesn't sound right to me.

edit: From here (http://www.classification.gov.au/www/cob/classification.nsf/Page/HowtoComplywithClassificationLaws_ComplianceforCin emasandOtherPublicExhibitors#2), "MA15+: In all States and Territories (except Queensland) it is an offence to exhibit an MA15+ film if a person aged under 15 years is present and they are not accompanied by their parent or adult guardian. In Queensland, a person aged between 2 and under 15 cannot be admitted to a MA15+ film unless they are accompanied by an adult."

Klose_the_Sith

2010-09-12, 08:17 AM

Just because kids in high schools might be having sex or doing drugs doesn't mean these things are appropriate subject matters for a high school class. I know exactly what high schoolers are getting up to do, but I still support censorship in matters such as these. The teacher in this case might have gone a little far, since nothing was actually said, just implied, but I don't think you could make a correlation between censorship and intelligence level.

So you'd rather just let them do whatever without any thoughts to consequences, greatly increasing risks of diseases, tragedies and death? :smallconfused:

If an age-group is engaging in something then it's ALWAYS appropriate to discuss that with them, whether or not the act in question is.

Rawhide

2010-09-12, 08:19 AM

I was required to check recently, and it's actually, in this state anyway, illegal in Australia to view an MA movie if you're under 15, or allow someone under 15 to see an MA movie, with or without an adult with them.

What state?

In Queensland it is:
Home Entertainment - A person aged under 15 cannot purchase or rent an MA 15+ film or computer game unless accompanied by an adult.
Cinema - A person aged under 15 cannot be admitted to an MA 15+ film unless accompanied by an adult. The requirements are not met if the adult buys a ticket, but does not accompany the child in the cinema for the duration of the film.

All other states:
Home Entertainment - A person aged under 15 cannot purchase or rent an MA 15+ film or computer game unless accompanied by his or her parent or an adult guardian.
Cinema - A person aged under 15 cannot be admitted to an MA 15+ film unless accompanied by his or her parent or an adult guardian. The requirements are not met if the parent or adult guardian buys a ticket, but does not accompany the child in the cinema for the duration of the film.

kyoryu

2010-09-12, 09:15 PM

First off, congrats on the award. That's awesome.

Now, I'd like to explain the probable motive of the teachers in wanting to censor the film.

Most school officials, more than anything else, are motivated by fear of causing A Stir. See, when A Stir is created, they have to go to meetings, explain things to the principal/school board/etc., and it generally makes their life annoying.

So they set strict standards, as a way of covering their butts. This is pretty much what "zero tolerance" is about, as well - by making rigid, mechanical rules they remove any chance of poor judgement calls, and when they have to do something they can just blame the rules instead.

Anyway. So your film bumps up against one of the rules. This is bad for the staff. It does two things:

1) Increases the chance that someone goes home and talks about the film that they saw, and thus creates A Stir.
2) Sets precedent for this being allowable. Now, the next time that someone wants to do something not allowed by the rules, they can point at your film and say "but they got to do it!", even if your film did it for entirely honorable reasons and theirs.... er, doesn't.

In a lot of ways this is the worst case scenario for school staff. On the one hand, if they allow students to get away with more, they have to deal with angry parents about the content that was permitted and shown. If they don't allow someone to re-create Deep Throat, then they get calls from *other* angry parents claiming it's a matter of discrimination against their kids, after all you allowed that film to suggest a four-letter-word last year. Whatever they do, they're screwed.

I'm not saying that any of this is right, or good, or justified. Just that it's pretty much the way it goes, and understanding it will probably help get a good result in the future.

Cealocanth

2010-09-12, 10:37 PM

Katana_Geldar

2010-09-12, 11:13 PM

Have you considered submitting the short film to the classification review board to get an official rating? You could then use this to demonstrate that the film fell within the original entry guidelines as well as falling within the allowable guidelines for showing in schools. Even now that it has not been disqualified, you may want to consider this.

That costs money, it's why so many indie films in festivals are "refused classification" or "exempt from classification" as they can't afford to submit it.

kyoryu

2010-09-12, 11:17 PM

That explains a lot about why schools have been so irrational lately. No wonder people are getting suspended for ridiculous stuff like breaking their pencil on accident and then getting a splinter from it. This is cowardice at it's worst, when hundreds of thousands of people are getting their privlages taken away because of fear alone.

Zero-tolerance policies are entirely about lawsuit risk mitigation. They exist entirely to ensure that there is no way that the school can be open to a lawsuit in case some kid does flip out. If they absolutely ban everything, no matter how innocuous, that might be a "signal", they can deny culpability. A strict zero tolerance policy *also* acts as a shield against angry parents.

Whether they even protect a single individual is a secondary concern.

It's a terrible thing, but it's not entirely the fault of the schools.

Recaiden

2010-09-13, 01:19 AM

That sounds more like a weak-will leading to an addiction or inability to cope with emotions due to being sheltered from all similar feelings and thus stunted in one's development as a person.

Yeah, but a lot of people do have emotional problems, and sex is a sensitive issue to a lot of people even if they don't.

742

2010-09-13, 09:32 PM

but why censor things in the first place? how does it help anyone? it makes about as much sense to me as restarting your computer after saving a word document. i dont get the rationale behind it or where it originated.

edit: i do like the idea of having a summary on the package, so you can know what your getting into, but not of ever limiting what someone can see.

Thajocoth

2010-09-13, 09:38 PM

but why censor things in the first place? how does it help anyone? it makes about as much sense to me as restarting your computer after saving a word document. i dont get the rationale behind it or where it originated.

You're right. It's just how things have been for centuries... So it's just what people expect now and somehow think is normal. I don't really get it either.

Katana_Geldar

2010-09-13, 09:46 PM

Ideas can be dangerous, and when you want to control people you control ideas and what they can read/see/listen.

max-is-working

2010-09-14, 05:00 AM

So someone who supports censorship is inherently less intelligent? You might want to think about that one some more.
Woah. Slow down. That's not what I said at all! I can see why you interpreted my comment as that, but that's taking my words too far, I think. I said the teacher is probably of such-and-such kind of stereotypical teacher and makes me think of so-and-so kind of stereotypical teacher. I'm sorry but I didn't even intend a direct connection between the first ranty-reaction and the second ranty-reaction; I definitely didn't intend to take a universal stance against censorship or say that censors and pro-censorship people are less intelligent. Goodness!

Also, I don't appreciate the tone of your comment - not that I'm accusing you of having that tone on purpose. It sounds like you intended to talk down to me? If you did, I'm not sure I deserve a talking-down-to without first asking for a clarification of where I was coming from with my comment. If you didn't, then I'm sorry for bringing it up, and I'm sorry if my comment above and in this paragraph sounds like I have something against you and your comment, but, well, its tone (intended or otherwise) did affect me, and I'm sorry for that too. :-) Though just forget it, please. I'm moving out of this thread. :-)

VanBuren

2010-09-14, 12:25 PM

Telonius

2010-09-14, 12:33 PM

Okay, let's go to the source (http://universitytoolkit.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp).

A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision.

The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture.

Emphasis added. Implying that somebody said a curse word doesn't even register a blip on the radar.

Also... (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0085334/quotes)

Ralphie: Oooh fuuudge!
Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] Only I didn't say "Fudge." I said THE word, the big one, the queen-mother of dirty words, the "F-dash-dash-dash" word!
Mr. Parker: [stunned] *What* did you say?
Ralphie: Uh, um...
Mr. Parker: That's... what I thought you said. Get in the car. Go on!
Ralphie as Adult: [narrating] It was all over - I was dead. What would it be? The guillotine? Hanging? The chair? The rack? The Chinese water torture? Hmmph. Mere child's play compared to what surely awaited me.

I'm assuming you implied the same word. If your history teacher thinks that "A Christmas Story" isn't appropriate for high school viewing, then he's a total loon.

THAC0

2010-09-14, 12:57 PM

That explains a lot about why schools have been so irrational lately. No wonder people are getting suspended for ridiculous stuff like breaking their pencil on accident and then getting a splinter from it. This is cowardice at it's worst, when hundreds of thousands of people are getting their privlages taken away because of fear alone.

Oh, and congrats on the award.

Maybe if parents wouldn't Freak Out over ridiculous things, then schools could be less ridiculous in return.

My first year of teaching was quite eye-opening. It did make me far more cautious and has led me to second-guess my decisions many times, despite the fact that I was completely in the right according to both law and school policy.

But then again, we live in times where teachers can be fired or denied certification for such things as having a glass of wine with dinner at a public restaurant. Ridiculousness abounds on all sides.

Thajocoth

2010-09-14, 01:55 PM

I don't think that censorship in and of itself is bad; I'm certainly in favor of preventing small children from watching hardcore pornography for instance, but there's definitely a point where it becomes an obstacle and stops being useful.

You know, we're the only species on the planet that believes sex needs to be hidden from anyone. If you get two dogs, chances are that the kids will see sex... Just not between humans. I REALLY don't see the difference.

I'm not against censoring some violence. By censoring here, I mean using a ratings system to only allow people of age X to watch different levels of violence in film and whatnot. The average porn would get an E rating from me. (Sorry, I only know the ESRB rating system for video games.) It hurts no one in any way.

VanBuren

2010-09-14, 01:59 PM

You know, we're the only species on the planet that believes sex needs to be hidden from anyone. If you get two dogs, chances are that the kids will see sex... Just not between humans. I REALLY don't see the difference.

I'm not against censoring some violence. By censoring here, I mean using a ratings system to only allow people of age X to watch different levels of violence in film and whatnot. The average porn would get an E rating from me. (Sorry, I only know the video game rating system.) It hurts no one in any way.

The "average porn" doesn't tend to give a healthy view of intimate relationships. I agree that as a society we're a bit too tightly-wound about sex, but I don't think the solution is to let first-graders watch Anal Schoolgirl Sluts VIII*.

*I don't think that's the name of an actual porn, and if it is don't shatter the illusion for I shall weep openly.

Telonius

2010-09-14, 02:02 PM

Thajocoth

2010-09-14, 02:03 PM

The "average porn" doesn't tend to give a healthy view of intimate relationships. I agree that as a society we're a bit too tightly-wound about sex, but I don't think the solution is to let first-graders watch Anal Schoolgirl Sluts VIII*.

*I don't think that's the name of an actual porn, and if it is don't shatter the illusion for I shall weep openly.

Porn doesn't usually give ANY view of intimate relationships. Porn is simply parts, positions and placements. Combine X with Y for a few minutes. Now combine Y with Z for the next few.

Personally, I think a kid would find it boring and go do something else, assuming all the stigma was removed. Stigma, naturally, makes something more interesting...

Now, obviously, there's violent porn too... I'd count that violence towards the ratings of it. If there's hitting/shackling/ect - T, BDSM - M, Guro - AO... But it's because of the violence level, not the sex.

InaVegt

2010-09-14, 02:07 PM

You know, we're the only species on the planet that believes sex needs to be hidden from anyone.

Overstatement.

In many human cultures, sex isn't treated as anything special.

The Dutch movie rating agency has no qualms rating a movie with topless women as 'MG-6' (adult guidance advised for viewers of six years old or younger)

Thajocoth

2010-09-14, 02:10 PM

Overstatement.

In many human cultures, sex isn't treated as anything special.

The Dutch movie rating agency has no qualms rating a movie with topless women as 'MG-6' (adult guidance advised for viewers of six years old or younger)

Sorry, I meant a single direction conditional. If someone believes sex needs to be hidden from others, they're human. Not the reverse, as you've pointed out. I'll often think more in code and logic with something like this, and then try to translate it to English, which is a messy language to interpret.

EDIT: I should probably leave this discussion before it gets too close to a forbidden topic. I believe I've explained my view well enough. So this is just to let you know that I will no longer be responding here.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-14, 02:20 PM

Hardcore pornography rated E?

No. If they ever do that here, I'm not going out to movies ever again.

I like censorship because it removes thing I frankly don't want to see. although I'm losing faith in the rating system when I have to look up PG-13 movies online to make sure there's nothing there that'll make me feel uncomfortable (As nudity does and certain types of violence do.)

And I'm not watching Watchmen. I can just rent the book which I'm sure I'll like much better.

JonestheSpy

2010-09-14, 03:03 PM

It's not recent but it was used in Ghostbusters and that was rated PG.

Precedent is your friend.

Knaight

2010-09-14, 03:21 PM

I like censorship because it removes thing I frankly don't want to see. although I'm losing faith in the rating system when I have to look up PG-13 movies online to make sure there's nothing there that'll make me feel uncomfortable (As nudity does and certain types of violence do.)

The rating system isn't inherently censorship though, it only becomes censorship if certain people aren't allowed to watch things due to rating, the system can stay without the law, and many informal rating systems do. I would even call the informal ones more useful in many cases, a single axis rating system seems odd.

hamishspence

2010-09-14, 03:25 PM

Ratings can vary from country to country. Watership Down is a U in the UK but a PG in the US.

So what might appear acceptable may turn out to be problematic in less permissive places.

One can imagine what happens when someone's told "Bring any U certificate DVD in for the kids to watch" and they happen to pick that one.

kyoryu

2010-09-14, 03:47 PM

Maybe if parents wouldn't Freak Out over ridiculous things, then schools could be less ridiculous in return.

My first year of teaching was quite eye-opening. It did make me far more cautious and has led me to second-guess my decisions many times, despite the fact that I was completely in the right according to both law and school policy.

But then again, we live in times where teachers can be fired or denied certification for such things as having a glass of wine with dinner at a public restaurant. Ridiculousness abounds on all sides.

My point exactly. Schools are overly defensive about things like this due to the fear of lawsuits/etc. It's easier, and safer, to have an overly strict policy that is applied without individual judgement.

These policies typically aren't about protecting kids from "bad things" so much as they are about protecting schools from lawsuits and unnecessary parent freakouts.

Let's say a teacher wants to show Controversial Movie. To do so, they write permission slips for the parents to sign, offer an alternate assignment that is Not Controversial, and brace for the fact that even if they do this, it is still likely that they'll have to face people screaming at them - even if none of those people have kids in the teacher's class.

Or, they can choose to show Safe Movie, and get on with their lives.

Which do you think they're going to do? Does the choice have anything to do with them trying to censor kids, or what the kids view?

Klose_the_Sith

2010-09-14, 04:28 PM

Personally, I think a kid would find it boring and go do something else, assuming all the stigma was removed. Stigma, naturally, makes something more interesting...

Oooh! Oooh!

*Puts hand up*

I was exposed to porn as a small child, via the internet.

As I recall, I went "Aaaah weird!" and closed the browser.

Then I went off to play neopets.

Katana_Geldar

2010-09-14, 05:47 PM

The thing about ratings is that you more or less know what you're getting. You go to see Wolf Creek, for instance...:smalleek:

Mystic Muse

2010-09-14, 05:56 PM

What's the rating "U" mean? I'm only familiar with the US ratings.

Katana_Geldar

2010-09-14, 06:14 PM

Universal, I think. The UK has similar ratings.

KilltheToy

2010-09-14, 08:41 PM

Let's say a teacher wants to show Controversial Movie. To do so, they write permission slips for the parents to sign, offer an alternate assignment that is Not Controversial, and brace for the fact that even if they do this, it is still likely that they'll have to face people screaming at them - even if none of those people have kids in the teacher's class.

Or, they can choose to show Safe Movie, and get on with their lives.

Which do you think they're going to do? Does the choice have anything to do with them trying to censor kids, or what the kids view?

Some teachers, though, really don't care. Last year my history teacher, a major film buff, showed us all sorts of movies that our district would have never allowed such as Gangs of New York.

Katana_Geldar

2010-09-14, 08:44 PM

One of these days I want to show some students a rather contraversial cartoon Der Furher's Face to look at propaganda.

KnightDisciple

2010-09-14, 08:54 PM

Some teachers, though, really don't care. Last year my history teacher, a major film buff, showed us all sorts of movies that our district would have never allowed such as Gangs of New York.That's...I dunno, that sounds like a bad example. That's telling the kids "I know the rules, but I don't feel like following them, this is more fun. So who cares about the rules?". Is that really a good message?
I'm not trying to be condemning per se, but that really doesn't seem like a good attitude.

Sholos

2010-09-15, 07:47 AM

I'm assuming you implied the same word. If your history teacher thinks that "A Christmas Story" isn't appropriate for high school viewing, then he's a total loon.

The word rhymes with thick, so it wasn't even that bad; and, "A Christmas Story" isn't suitable viewing for any age. No one should be forced to watch that drivel.

And I'm not watching Watchmen. I can just rent the book which I'm sure I'll like much better.

Umm.... fair warning, the book isn't exactly your standard comic.

Anyways, I think some of the ratings can be kind of silly, but for the most part they're pretty accurate. There's a fine line between PG-13 and R and who should be watching what, but for the most part I agree with it. The ESRB is the one that annoys me. They have way more control over the game industry than the MPAA has over the film industry.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-15, 09:17 AM

The word rhymes with thick, so it wasn't even that bad; and, "A Christmas Story" isn't suitable viewing for any age. No one should be forced to watch that drivel.

Hey, I liked a Christmas Carol. Every version I've watched and the book version I read.

Umm.... fair warning, the book isn't exactly your standard comic.

I'm aware. I've read it twice. I probably could have phrased what I meant better though.

Pyrian

2010-09-15, 09:46 AM

That's...I dunno, that sounds like a bad example. That's telling the kids "I know the rules, but I don't feel like following them, this is more fun. So who cares about the rules?". Is that really a good message?
I'm not trying to be condemning per se, but that really doesn't seem like a good attitude.I don't think "always follow the rules, even when they're dumb" is an improvement. Now, which of us is being more hyperbolic? Knowing that sometimes, the rules aren't much use, is not a bad lesson.

KnightDisciple

2010-09-15, 09:53 AM

I don't think "always follow the rules, even when they're dumb" is an improvement. Now, which of us is being more hyperbolic? Knowing that sometimes, the rules aren't much use, is not a bad lesson.Maybe I should have added that I thought there are better ways to approach the situation. Speak with your school's principal. Look for good films that fit the rating criteria. Depending on the age of the group, possibly give a small list of recommendations that are slightly outside the school's allowance; if the school says "Nothing above PG", but you're teaching high school sophomores, give them some PG-13 recommendations.

The point is, instead of ignoring the rules and "the system", try to work with them. Because that's a better lesson.

After all, you'd need an entire class just to teach kids how to maturely and intelligently recognize when "the rules" (which includes, you know, the law) may actually be in error. Otherwise, dollars to doughnuts teenagers will view this as justification to ignore rules of any sort when it's "less fun" or inconvenient.

Pyrian

2010-09-15, 10:30 AM

The point is, instead of ignoring the rules and "the system", try to work with them.That's all very creative, but did you consider the possibility that all that already happened and the bureaucracy involved crushed it like the blind steam-roller it usually is? And what did that teach, do you think? Do you think it taught anybody to "respect the rules"?

After all, you'd need an entire class just to teach kids how to maturely and intelligently recognize when "the rules" (which includes, you know, the law) may actually be in error.This is nonsense. Most children are already forming highly complex opinions about the rules they live under by about five or so. It's their life. With some exceptions, of course. Generally speaking, though, kids know reasonably well which of the rules are abitrary, which are stupid, which are going to be enforced, which are not, and so on. Typically, the very first thing a child does upon learning its first rule is test it to see what happens when they break it.

Otherwise, dollars to doughnuts teenagers will view this as justification to ignore rules of any sort when it's "less fun" or inconvenient.See, I think this sort of thing is just insulting. Children are typically testing rules from the moment they're old enough to understand that there are rules.

Fiery Diamond

2010-09-15, 10:44 AM

The problem is, Pyrian, you are thinking about intelligent children/teenagers. You know, the ones who have common sense. You forget that common sense isn't all that common. The ones who don't have common sense will behave exactly as Knight Disciple is saying.

Basically, there are three kinds of teens.

1) "It's the rules, therefore I follow them." -probably the rarest
2) "It's the rules, but I wanna do it, so who cares." -probably the most prevalent
3) "It's the rules, but are these rules really appropriate?" -not common, but not rare either; this is the one that you, Pyrian, are identifying with: for the record, it's also the one I am/was (I no longer am a teenager, but I did think this way and still do).

Of course, this is a bit of oversimplification, but essentially correct.

KnightDisciple

2010-09-15, 10:55 AM

That's all very creative, but did you consider the possibility that all that already happened and the bureaucracy involved crushed it like the blind steam-roller it usually is? And what did that teach, do you think? Do you think it taught anybody to "respect the rules"?I don't know. I literally have only the information in that post.

Which mostly focuses on the teacher blithely ignoring the rules because he's a "film buff".

This is nonsense. Most children are already forming highly complex opinions about the rules they live under by about five or so. It's their life. With some exceptions, of course. Generally speaking, though, kids know reasonably well which of the rules are abitrary, which are stupid, which are going to be enforced, which are not, and so on. Typically, the very first thing a child does upon learning its first rule is test it to see what happens when they break it.Ha! You must have grown up around incredibly mature kids and teenagers.

I recall at least 50% of my classmates lacking common sense, and basically thinking they're so cool rules shouldn't matter. That authority was, inherently, stupid.

See, I think this sort of thing is just insulting. Children are typically testing rules from the moment they're old enough to understand that there are rules.That sounds a bit naive to me. In my experience (and memory of myself), kids are just as often chafing at not being able to do whatever they want. It's not some complex "test the rules to see what their worth is", it's "I wanna do this! But I wanna! You can't make me!".

The stories my mother brings home nearly every day from her job as a school principal bear this out.

The problem is, Pyrian, you are thinking about intelligent children/teenagers. You know, the ones who have common sense. You forget that common sense isn't all that common. The ones who don't have common sense will behave exactly as Knight Disciple is saying.

Basically, there are three kinds of teens.

1) "It's the rules, therefore I follow them." -probably the rarest
2) "It's the rules, but I wanna do it, so who cares." -probably the most prevalent
3) "It's the rules, but are these rules really appropriate?" -not common, but not rare either; this is the one that you, Pyrian, are identifying with: for the record, it's also the one I am/was (I no longer am a teenager, but I did think this way and still do).

Of course, this is a bit of oversimplification, but essentially correct.Essentially, yes.

Though in my experience, 3 is as rare or rarer than 1. 2 is absurdly abundant until at least college.

Sholos

2010-09-15, 12:28 PM

Hey, I liked a Christmas Carol. Every version I've watched and the book version I read.
The first time I saw it was about a year ago, and I couldn't sit through it. I respect your right to enjoy it, though.

I'm aware. I've read it twice. I probably could have phrased what I meant better though.

Ah. The way you phrased it made it sound like you hadn't read it at all. I am surprised, though, that nudity in comics doesn't bother you.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-15, 01:09 PM

Ah. The way you phrased it made it sound like you hadn't read it at all. I am surprised, though, that nudity in comics doesn't bother you.

yeah, I phrased it poorly. I barely even considered that nudity. It wasn't remotely detailed or realistic looking so I wasn't really bothered. the only other thing I saw that was nudity was Niteowl and Silk Spectre together but nothing was shown so I didn't care.

Thajocoth

2010-09-15, 01:48 PM

"A Christmas Story"Some kid wants a gun for Christmas.

a Christmas CarolAbout Scrooge being visited by three ghosts

These are two very different stories. A Christmas Carol is ok and has a good moral. A Christmas Story... I sat through some of to be polite last Christmas, but I just had to get up and go do something else. The people I was with, for some inexplicable reason, liked it.

VanBuren

2010-09-15, 01:58 PM

I dunno, I liked it. It was kinda nostalgic while at the same time filled with dark and somewhat cynical humor.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-15, 02:05 PM

Some kid wants a gun for Christmas.

Oh. *Slightly long and drawn out*

Never mind. Never seen it, read it, or heard of it.

Thajocoth

2010-09-15, 02:15 PM

Oh. *Slightly long and drawn out*

Never mind. Never seen it, read it, or heard of it.

I don't recommend it. It's very obviously written by someone who who had a very strange childhood. I'd have an easier time relating Bugs Bunny as realistic than any character or thought in that movie. (The main character narrates, explaining his thoughts as he goes.) I probably only saw, like, 20 minutes of it...

Mystic Muse

2010-09-15, 02:21 PM

I don't recommend it. It's very obviously written by someone who who had a very strange childhood. I'd have an easier time relating Bugs Bunny as realistic than any character or thought in that movie. (The main character narrates, explaining his thoughts as he goes.) I probably only saw, like, 20 minutes of it...

Good to know.

Sholos

2010-09-15, 11:54 PM

Some kid wants a gun for Christmas.

About Scrooge being visited by three ghosts

These are two very different stories. A Christmas Carol is ok and has a good moral. A Christmas Story... I sat through some of to be polite last Christmas, but I just had to get up and go do something else. The people I was with, for some inexplicable reason, liked it.

I am amused. I was misinterpreted (by equating Christmas Story with Christmas Carol), and then I misread (Christmas Carol for Christmas Story). For the record, I enjoy A Christmas Carol when it's done well. My favorite is probably the Muppet one.

Mystic Muse

2010-09-16, 12:34 AM

I am amused. I was misinterpreted (by equating Christmas Story with Christmas Carol), and then I misread (Christmas Carol for Christmas Story). For the record, I enjoy A Christmas Carol when it's done well. My favorite is probably the Muppet one.

Didn't even know there was a muppet one.

I need to see the DIsney one (The one with Disney characters, not the 3D animated one)

Serpentine

2010-09-16, 12:38 AM

You don't know A Muppet Christmas Carol?! :O

Mystic Muse

2010-09-16, 12:43 AM

You don't know A Muppet Christmas Carol?! :O

First time I've heard of it.

I didn't know there was a muppet treasure Island until I listened to the "Top 11 villain songs" either.

Other than the wizard of Oz one and those two, I'm not aware of any other muppet movies.

Thajocoth

2010-09-16, 05:12 AM

First time I've heard of it.

I didn't know there was a muppet treasure Island until I listened to the "Top 11 villain songs" either.

Other than the wizard of Oz one and those two, I'm not aware of any other muppet movies.

The Muppet version is quite good. One of my favorite versions. They add enough silly without removing any of the serious.

Telonius

2010-09-16, 10:16 AM

I don't recommend it. It's very obviously written by someone who who had a very strange childhood..

Talk to anybody around 50+ years old who grew up near the Great Lakes. It's loads of nostalgia for those folks, so it's not really very uncommon. (Though I am still reserving judgment as to whether or not it was "strange." This is my parents' generation we're talking about after all).

kyoryu

2010-09-16, 03:27 PM

Talk to anybody around 50+ years old who grew up near the Great Lakes. It's loads of nostalgia for those folks, so it's not really very uncommon. (Though I am still reserving judgment as to whether or not it was "strange." This is my parents' generation we're talking about after all).

Most people in their 30s would probably understand it, as well.

AtlanteanTroll

2010-09-16, 03:50 PM

We watched Saving Private Ryan in class during 9th Grade.

742

2010-09-18, 08:22 AM

i think people should know what theyre getting into (and ive already said that) but

its not age that makes people react badly to things, its context. a really really bloody violent movie with context for all of it is okay to show a child. even out of context violence; if a child already has context for violence in their life whether from another piece of media or life experiences theres no harm in it. iirc kids learn fast if you let them*

*based on personal experiences which i could be remembering incorrectly.

edit: i seem to have missed a page, but then some of the posts for that page are here. either i need sleep or forums are messing up and i need sleep.