Tweet

EMAIL

PRINT

Comments (0)

 1 of 3

Last week, we ran a commentary about a recent court ruling that it's now illegal for companies like CleanFlicks and CleanFilms to "scrub" objectionable content from movies

Mark Moring's commentary, titled "No More Smut Editors?", agreed with the judge in principle. Moring's article didn't so much examine the legal technicalities of copyright law as it explored thephilosophical issues of the practice. Moring argued that such "scrubbing" is essentially tampering with art and an artist's creative vision. He also noted other ways for families to deal with movies that have objectionable content—including making the decision of not watching them at all

It was one of those topics that sent readers straight to their e-mail, because we received more than 100 letters on all sides of the issue. Here's a sampling of their replies:

So you think every film coming out of Hollywood is a piece of art needing the protection of a Renaissance painting? That's what filmmakers would like you to believe. If you were really thinking critically, you would recognize most films as unoriginal trash. "Teaching moment"? Sounds more like you're having a Senior Moment. I'm beginning to think the Christian mind is more than being watered down, it's melting down.
Meg Rossi

The CleanFlicks trend speaks to something about the evangelical culture. We demand to entertained (myself included). We're basically saying, "Give me movies and make them clean. I need stuff to watch." In reality, there is no form of entertainment we have to see. There is no must-see TV. If it hurts our Christian walk, if it violates our purity, get rid of it.
Dan Darling

Your argument about maintaining the artistic integrity of the films becomes specious when I think about how, for movies, this has long been the practice. Movies are edited all the time when they appear on non-premium cable. It's art when a family organization does it, it's not art when a television station does it. The art argument sounds good, but frankly it's artsy talk without artsy action.
Patrick Oden

This article is excellent and offers some wonderful advice to parents. Too many Christians stick their heads in the sand pretending that bad language, sex, etc. don't exist. Hiding it from children or teenagers does not prepare them to respond to it, and they will have to respond because it's everywhere.
Karin Peavy

I refuse to pay $10 at the theater to see a movie and then be surprised by the swearing, suggestive talking, etc. I would much rather pay Clean Films to remove the "surprises" for me. I prefer to sit on the edge of my seat because the movie is exciting—not because I am trying to catch something I do not want to hear or see and hit my fast forward button.
Katherine Swart

I am delighted with Mark Moring's article on why tampering with art is a bad fix. I'm an illustrator and art teacher who sees art as a language and each product as a message. The artist needs to say something on his/her own terms. The potential listeners/viewers have a responsibility to get savvy enough to listen or avoid. There just isn't any way for children to get discernment but to have guided exercise in it. Tampering with art lets parents be lazy, and nearly ensures that we'll keep raising kids who "eat" everything and stay flabby. It's a fallen world. The things we can expect from those who don't understand truth are filth, depravity, and twisted philosophies. The way we encourage them to look higher is to starve them out when messages aren't fit to consume. Approval is also a motivator—but if Christians have shown themselves to be an audience who will gladly modify a message for their own purposes, their good opinion is worthless to filmmakers. With our own actions, we encourage them to disregard us.
Judy Krysl

I think this ruling against editing services such as CleanFilms, which I use, is a terrible decision in the balance of copyright law and free market enterprise. I use CleanFilms for me and not for my two girls. I've decided that seeing nudity and sexual situations is bad for me. After they have gone off to bed, I want to be able to sit down and watch a DVD and not have to worry about when the "if-only-they-hadn't-included-that" scene is coming. I'm not looking to preview it before my children can see it. I don't even want to see it to begin with. I don't need those images in my mind. That's what's best for me and I want the freedom to be able to pay someone to do my "self-editing" for me.
Brandon Leafblad

next page... |  1 of 3 | last page

Related Elsewhere:

No More Smut Editors?	Printer view
A federal judge has ruled that it's illegal for companies to "sanitize" videos by editing objectionable content. And in principle, I tend to agree.