Mike's Musings: Putting it into CONTEXT
I watched the movie "Trust" a few nights ago, and it got me thinking. The MPAA gave the film an R rating, and at first glance, it makes sense. No kid needs to see the rape of a teenage girl. But now, I'm not so sure.
Kids, especially tween girls, are exposed to a lot of information and images these days, and their young minds aren't sure how to process it. Marketers target them because they're naiive and get money from their parents, thus making them a lucrative market. But not all of it is good, and parents aren't realizing it. Sure, Britney Spears' lyrics are free of profanity, but she dresses and dances in an extremely sexualized way. And parents bought their kids, mostly young girls, her albums by the truckload. The "Twilight" movies are another, more recent, case in point. The films put so much emphasis on Bella needing Edward to protect her and their love (I'll admit that I've only seen the first film, but the romantic undertones are hard to miss from even the movie posters).
This does two things: one, it makes her desire a boyfriend more strongly, and two, it makes them feel that their self-worth is equal to that of her boyfriend. Both are ridiculous and dangerous notions, especially for a girl that young. Hormones are just starting to activate her interest in boys (or in some cases, girls, but that's for another Mike's Musings), but her knowledge of her sexuality is nil, and it's not getting any better because parents are, for reasons that baffle me beyond belief, skittish about sex education. "Twilight" is telling her that she needs a studly boyfriend who is entirely devoted to her to be accepted, and marketers (even clothing liners) tell her that she needs to look sexy to get one.
The first scenes in the "Trust" are in some ways the most disturbing because they are so real. The protagonist, Annie, looks on at other girls who are talking with a bunch of cute guys. One would have to be obtuse not to feel her jealousy, her desire to be wanted by cute guys, and her loneliness. These three things are the ideal qualities that a predator like "Charlie" in the film looks for. They are so blindly willing to believe that a cute guy would be interested in them that they ignore the warning signs and "bad feelings" about what is happening.
There are those who support sex education including contraceptives for their kids. But is this enough? I don't think so. Believe me, I've been to no-holds barred sex ed classes in school. Watching a movie like "Trust" is totally different than hearing a middle aged teacher prattle on and tell you what you are like and what you feel. No one likes to be talked to like that, and they resent it. But lecturing has that effect. It depersonalizes the material and the one dispensing information sounds like a know-it-all to a kid who is just starting to recognize her independence.
But won't watching a movie like "Trust" be disturbing for such a young child? Yes, it will be. It was disturbing for me, and I just turned 24 two and a half hours ago. But that's the goal of the film. Any serious film about rape is going to be disturbing. If the film is difficult to watch, it's done its job. And that's why I said at the end of my review that this is a must-see for tween girls. It personalizes a subject that is a very real danger for them in a way that even the most noble teacher or educational video cannot.
But "Trust" isn't the only film to suffer from a misstep by the MPAA. "Mrs. Henderson Presents," one of my favorite films, is a good morale booster for girls and the perfect antidote for "Twilight." It encourages them to be proud of their bodies (something which few tweens are since their bodies change at different rates than their peers) and of being strong, independent women (something that the "Twilight" movies do not do).
But won't this make them more likely to have sex and go topless? Studies say no, but is it really that big of a deal? I recall reading in article about the differences in views on sex between the US and the Netherlands (I think, but who it was is really irrelevant). In the Netherlands, having a teenage girl sleep in the same bed as her boyfriend at his parents house is no big deal. Here, it's grounds for prosecution. If they use safe sex practices, chances are that not much is going to come out of it. But sex is such a touchy subject in the US that kids can't seem to get the right information. Boring lecturers versus big time marketing and movies. No wonder they're confused.
And just for arguement's sake, let me pose this question. If seeing sex in movies make kids more likely to have sex, then logically speaking, they would be more likely to become violent after seeing an action movie. And yet we allow teens, and young kids, to see violent action movies like "The Avengers" and "Wrath of the Titans." American hypocrisy at its best.
The crux of my argument has little to do with the movie "Trust" or "Twilight," however. It's that the MPAA fails to take in the context of a film. Jack Valenti said that he thought every 13 year old boy should see "Saving Private Ryan," a film that some suggested should have gotten an NC-17 rating for its unrelenting violence and gore. Surprising as it may sound, I can see his point. Steven Spielberg's masterpiece presents war as it really was: violent, terrifying and gory. Like "Trust," "Saving Private Ryan" is not meant to be light entertainment. It is meant to educate people on what the soldiers in World War II went through and what soldiers are going through now. It's a real wake up call from movies like "The Avengers" that portray violence as merely a good work out.
Not every heavy R rated film should be seen by kids and not every PG-13 action movie should be rated R. Action movies don't get any more lightweight (or funnier) than James Cameron's "True Lies." The film was rated R for "A Lot of Action/Violence and Some Language." For reasons only the MPAA knows, it leaves out the descriptor of a striptease sequence in which Jamie Lee Curtis strips. It's meant to be sexy, albeit in a strange way, but no more inappropriate for kids than a lot of the violence that happens in PG-13 movies ("Wrath of the Titan's predecessor featured a man getting ripped in half by a scorpion...bloodless, of course, since the presence of blood automatically means an R rating). And yet, the action scenes are not at all disturbing and a lot of fun...perfect for teenagers. I've been watching that movie since grade school, and as anyone who knows me can tell you, I am not a violent person. I talked with my parents a while back about them fast forwarding (this was in the days of the VCR) through the striptease sequence, and they agreed that it was hypocritical to allow my brother and I to watch the action while fast forwarding through said sequence. In retrospect, I'm kind of glad they did, although for different reasons. My ten year old self would have found it boring.
The bottom line is that communication is so important. It's not easy; I didn't like talking to my parents about that stuff very much, but it has to be done. I was reluctant to tell them anything personal like that because I was afraid of getting into trouble. But openness is key to safety, no matter how painful it must be. Try telling them about your experiences. Let them know that you've done bad things too, and it might let down their guard. Being open and nonjudgmental is key for safety and sanity on both sides.
And for the love of God, don't take anything the MPAA says at face value. You're only going to get screwed.
Kids, especially tween girls, are exposed to a lot of information and images these days, and their young minds aren't sure how to process it. Marketers target them because they're naiive and get money from their parents, thus making them a lucrative market. But not all of it is good, and parents aren't realizing it. Sure, Britney Spears' lyrics are free of profanity, but she dresses and dances in an extremely sexualized way. And parents bought their kids, mostly young girls, her albums by the truckload. The "Twilight" movies are another, more recent, case in point. The films put so much emphasis on Bella needing Edward to protect her and their love (I'll admit that I've only seen the first film, but the romantic undertones are hard to miss from even the movie posters).
This does two things: one, it makes her desire a boyfriend more strongly, and two, it makes them feel that their self-worth is equal to that of her boyfriend. Both are ridiculous and dangerous notions, especially for a girl that young. Hormones are just starting to activate her interest in boys (or in some cases, girls, but that's for another Mike's Musings), but her knowledge of her sexuality is nil, and it's not getting any better because parents are, for reasons that baffle me beyond belief, skittish about sex education. "Twilight" is telling her that she needs a studly boyfriend who is entirely devoted to her to be accepted, and marketers (even clothing liners) tell her that she needs to look sexy to get one.
The first scenes in the "Trust" are in some ways the most disturbing because they are so real. The protagonist, Annie, looks on at other girls who are talking with a bunch of cute guys. One would have to be obtuse not to feel her jealousy, her desire to be wanted by cute guys, and her loneliness. These three things are the ideal qualities that a predator like "Charlie" in the film looks for. They are so blindly willing to believe that a cute guy would be interested in them that they ignore the warning signs and "bad feelings" about what is happening.
There are those who support sex education including contraceptives for their kids. But is this enough? I don't think so. Believe me, I've been to no-holds barred sex ed classes in school. Watching a movie like "Trust" is totally different than hearing a middle aged teacher prattle on and tell you what you are like and what you feel. No one likes to be talked to like that, and they resent it. But lecturing has that effect. It depersonalizes the material and the one dispensing information sounds like a know-it-all to a kid who is just starting to recognize her independence.
But won't watching a movie like "Trust" be disturbing for such a young child? Yes, it will be. It was disturbing for me, and I just turned 24 two and a half hours ago. But that's the goal of the film. Any serious film about rape is going to be disturbing. If the film is difficult to watch, it's done its job. And that's why I said at the end of my review that this is a must-see for tween girls. It personalizes a subject that is a very real danger for them in a way that even the most noble teacher or educational video cannot.
But "Trust" isn't the only film to suffer from a misstep by the MPAA. "Mrs. Henderson Presents," one of my favorite films, is a good morale booster for girls and the perfect antidote for "Twilight." It encourages them to be proud of their bodies (something which few tweens are since their bodies change at different rates than their peers) and of being strong, independent women (something that the "Twilight" movies do not do).
But won't this make them more likely to have sex and go topless? Studies say no, but is it really that big of a deal? I recall reading in article about the differences in views on sex between the US and the Netherlands (I think, but who it was is really irrelevant). In the Netherlands, having a teenage girl sleep in the same bed as her boyfriend at his parents house is no big deal. Here, it's grounds for prosecution. If they use safe sex practices, chances are that not much is going to come out of it. But sex is such a touchy subject in the US that kids can't seem to get the right information. Boring lecturers versus big time marketing and movies. No wonder they're confused.
And just for arguement's sake, let me pose this question. If seeing sex in movies make kids more likely to have sex, then logically speaking, they would be more likely to become violent after seeing an action movie. And yet we allow teens, and young kids, to see violent action movies like "The Avengers" and "Wrath of the Titans." American hypocrisy at its best.
The crux of my argument has little to do with the movie "Trust" or "Twilight," however. It's that the MPAA fails to take in the context of a film. Jack Valenti said that he thought every 13 year old boy should see "Saving Private Ryan," a film that some suggested should have gotten an NC-17 rating for its unrelenting violence and gore. Surprising as it may sound, I can see his point. Steven Spielberg's masterpiece presents war as it really was: violent, terrifying and gory. Like "Trust," "Saving Private Ryan" is not meant to be light entertainment. It is meant to educate people on what the soldiers in World War II went through and what soldiers are going through now. It's a real wake up call from movies like "The Avengers" that portray violence as merely a good work out.
Not every heavy R rated film should be seen by kids and not every PG-13 action movie should be rated R. Action movies don't get any more lightweight (or funnier) than James Cameron's "True Lies." The film was rated R for "A Lot of Action/Violence and Some Language." For reasons only the MPAA knows, it leaves out the descriptor of a striptease sequence in which Jamie Lee Curtis strips. It's meant to be sexy, albeit in a strange way, but no more inappropriate for kids than a lot of the violence that happens in PG-13 movies ("Wrath of the Titan's predecessor featured a man getting ripped in half by a scorpion...bloodless, of course, since the presence of blood automatically means an R rating). And yet, the action scenes are not at all disturbing and a lot of fun...perfect for teenagers. I've been watching that movie since grade school, and as anyone who knows me can tell you, I am not a violent person. I talked with my parents a while back about them fast forwarding (this was in the days of the VCR) through the striptease sequence, and they agreed that it was hypocritical to allow my brother and I to watch the action while fast forwarding through said sequence. In retrospect, I'm kind of glad they did, although for different reasons. My ten year old self would have found it boring.
The bottom line is that communication is so important. It's not easy; I didn't like talking to my parents about that stuff very much, but it has to be done. I was reluctant to tell them anything personal like that because I was afraid of getting into trouble. But openness is key to safety, no matter how painful it must be. Try telling them about your experiences. Let them know that you've done bad things too, and it might let down their guard. Being open and nonjudgmental is key for safety and sanity on both sides.
And for the love of God, don't take anything the MPAA says at face value. You're only going to get screwed.
Comments
Post a Comment