Related articles and links |  1 of 7

R-rated movies were off-limits—they were full of corrupting influence. But as I got older, I started testing the waters, seeing a few "R" flicks that had been widely acclaimed (well, I guess I can't count my first R-film—Predator. That was an inexcusable decision. I loved it.) I began to question whether the rating on the movie was really what should determine its value or not. I walked away from some of those films—Witness, Dangerous Liaisons, Apocalypse Now, and Blade Runner, to name a few—deeply moved by the stories, my mind preoccupied by something far more significant than a glimpse of nudity or the bloody aftermath of a gunshot. Their themes were honorable, their lessons worthwhile, and the people in them were memorable characters with strengths and weaknesses that I could sometimes understand. Clearly, there were other works that were merely indulgent, crass entertainment. Learning to discern the difference between what is "worthy of praise" (Philippians 4:8) and what is inappropriate became to me a crucial factor in developing a Christian perspective on the arts.

In the mail I receive from readers, I find many to have a definite list of no-no's that automatically disqualify a movie from relevance. Some, for example, complain that we gave attention to a film that includes characters in various states of undress. Likewise, some of the critics we profile each week clinically dissect the contents of a film, counting occurrences of the "S" word and "F" word and describing in detail each bullet wound. A few will admit to being impressed by a film, but then discount it because they glimpsed a bare breast. Others spend time exploring the story, and only mention these volatile elements of a film to caution parents that their children might not be ready for this sort of viewing.

And it's not just a Christian thing. More politicians are calling for stricter filters. But others are concerned that such intervention gives opportunity for censorship.

In hopes of contributing some glimmers of guidance, Film Forum is opening the discussion, inviting critics and moviegoers to voice their thoughts on the "hot topics". Sex. Nudity. Foul Language. Violence. Can we find any consensus on what to make of these controversial onscreen occurrences? Let's start with nudity.

Pastor and scholar John Stuart Peck, author of What the Bible Teaches about the Holy Spirit and other works, has recently published an article in Cornerstone magazine on sex in art. The exploration is timely, challenging, and thorough, especially in. defining pornography away from Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's classic 1964 definition of "I know it when I see it":

The difference between erotic art and pornography, and the distinctive qualities of a Christian view of sex in art, lie in the following: (1) in the extent to which the dominant effect and intention is to induce sexual arousal: pornography focuses on it; (2) in the focus on the relationship involved rather than sexual gratification: pornography is preoccupied with the latter; and (3) the degree to which it is redemptive and rescues our sexual life from improper exposure and from the idea that sex is an activity with no meaning beyond the physical experience: pornography aims to make sexual intimacy freely accessible without the claims of privacy and commitment.

next page... |  1 of 7

share this page

July (Web-only) 2001, Vol. 45