Hollywood not in touch with morals, religion

[IDrinkaRum]

In America, Christianity is religion. Most religious Americans choose it as their religion, or some derivative of it.

I keep forgetting that. I know so many non-Christians, that Christianity being the #1 religion in America, I keep forgetting about it.

FTR? I'm a Christian. Roman Catholic to be exact.

[Flyndaran]

I keep forgetting that. I know so many non-Christians, that Christianity being the #1 religion in America, I keep forgetting about it.

FTR? I'm a Christian. Roman Catholic to be exact.

One of my sister in laws is an american catholic. I like to think of her catholic, only not. She graduated college but athesit me knows SO much more about the religion. That's irritating.
She didn't know what I meant when I made an offhand comment about the one unforgiveable sin, when the Pope is officially infalible, etc.

You must get a lot of hassle about your long term corrupt leadership. Of course, you personally can be a wonderful caring person, and I don't expect all you guys to rail against the leaders every time you mention your religion to a stranger.

[PepperElf]

I have to say... Yes I think Hollywood is out of touch. It doesn't mean it won't sell but... to me there's an undercurrent of "It's ok to bash religions we dislike".


some of the prime examples I can think of...

1) Victor Salva.
Pleaded guilty to 5 felony counts of child sex abuse in 1988. Didn't seem to kill his popularity with hollywood though.

2) Mel Gibson.
He had ONE public screwup and now... hell he's still the butt of jokes. I honestly think... if he hadn't filmed "The Passion of the Christ" hollywood would have just chalked it up as "woops" and moved on, like they do with all the other actors who have drunk incidents. But... yes religions and morals, and stressing them... I think it goes against a lot of what hollywood is trying to sell, which is why they attack more.

Hell look how many times Lidsey Lohan had to get drunk and screw up before they started making fun of her in public. Or Paris.

3) Bradjelina
Proof that if you have a history of violence to the papperazi, have a crazy sexual history, and break a marriage to be together... well it's OK. As long as you look sexy while doing it and donate a lot to charity.


Come to think of it... When I went to rent from blockbuster last, I saw an odd film there that... just looked interesting. I'd never heard of it hitting the screen. "The Last Sin-Eater". All about some pocket culture where they designate one person to "eat the sins" of someone who's dying. I don't know if I'd have rented it or not, except that the Sin-Eater was played by Peter Wingfield (Methos!!!!)

And after watching it, I realized why I never heard of it before. It turned out to be a very Christian movie about religion and faith, produced by Michael Landon Jr. ... personally I loved it and would consider buying my own copy. (tissues recommended)

But I know why hollywood wouldn't. Movies about morals don't sell as well as movies about the darkness of humanity. Or so Hollywood thinks... And when something with morals is popular without hollywood approval... o boy. look out for the fight, cos you know some kind of attack is coming somehow.

[Flyndaran]

A group of businesses which only have one thing in common, entertainment, has lost touch with morality?
I say that it never had anything to do with religion and morality. It's not the business of business to mediate, declare, or have anything to do with, morality.

The idea that Hollywood has anything more to do with morality than GM, Microsoft, or any other non-entertainment business makes no sense to me.

[AdminAssistant]

Exactly, Hollywood has one goal. Money. And I've said it before, but art, all art, reflects the society from which it comes, not vice versa. Violence, corruption, greed - all of these are present in America, and quite frankly, makes for more interesting storytelling. I also really hate any kind of art form that is prescriptive or preachy. That's not what art is supposed to be, it's supposed to be reflective.

PepperElf - Christian-themed entertainment is just a very separate niche market. Some things have mainstreamed, mostly children's programming like VeggieTales. But something as evangelical as, say, the Left Behind series is not going to sell well outside of the Christian market, so why would they waste money marketing beyond that market?

[Flyndaran]

Not quite. Art reflects society yes, but censorship, voluntary or not, can and does skew the collection.
Just look at the idylic world of 50's tv sans blacks, teen pregnancy, etc.

[PepperElf]

it's not so much that "hollywood isn't promoting those movies because they won't sell outisde the niche"... it's more that i feel...

if you're part of that niche hollywood spends more time bashing you


and that... yes hollywood is there for entertainment
which, in hollywoodese means "push our own political views"

that's what i'm tired of most... people in la la land trying to tell the rest of us how to live, when a lot of them haven't been in reality for ... quite some time.

[Slytovhand]

Which is no different to any other media outlet... money talks.

[AdminAssistant]

Flyn - Television in the 1950's is a reflection of that society, because of the conspicuous absence of minorities, etc. One thing I like to look at with theatre is how the kinds of theatre being produced can inform us on that society - and what's not there can say just as much, if not more, about society than what is.

PepperElf - The vast, and I mean vast, majority of artists as a whole (at least in the US) are liberal Democrats. Because the Democratic party actually supports the National Endowment for the Arts whereas the Republican party is constantly trying to eliminate it. Many are also iffy on the issue of religion because religion has a long history of censorship.

I see what you may feel is an attack on those with more conservative morals/beliefs as an attack on the hypocrisy of some who hold those beliefs.

Is there a specific example you can think of? Might help the discussion.

[Flyndaran]

Flyn - Television in the 1950's is a reflection of that society, because of the conspicuous absence of minorities, etc. One thing I like to look at with theatre is how the kinds of theatre being produced can inform us on that society - and what's not there can say just as much, if not more, about society than what is.

....

Only if you know the REALITY of such a society such as how there has always been a third non-white of the popluation, the real teen pregnancy rates, the real divorce rates, etc. If you don't know all that, then you really might believe that 1950's TV represented an existing white-utopia rather than the gross propaganda that it was.

[AdminAssistant]

It's a tool for historians, and I seriously doubt any historian worth his/her salt wouldn't know the reality of the situation. But it still informs us on the culture of the 50's, which was very utopian-esque.

I guess TV really isn't the best example....My research interest is 19th/early 20th century French theatre. And theatre, of course, is far superior to television in many ways.

[guywithashovel]

For some reason, right-wingers like to complain about everything having a "liberal bias." I guess it just makes them feel more important.

As for their gripes about movies, the industry simply puts out what sells best. Remember all that "free market" stuff you all like to tout so much? Oh, that's right. Most of the right-wingers who complain about movies and books and try to get them banned are social conservatives, which is essentially a synonym for totalitarianism. When the rest of us watch movies, we want to be entertained instead of being superficial. If you don't like what's out there, then simply stay at home and rent "Fireproof."

[smileyeagle1021]

As for their gripes about movies, the industry simply puts out what sells best. Remember all that "free market" stuff you all like to tout so much?

put more eloquently... they like the free market when it agrees with them... they like facism when it agrees with them, they like totalitarianism when it agrees with them... put simply, they only like things/people that agree with them.

[Flyndaran]

put more eloquently... they like the free market when it agrees with them... they like facism when it agrees with them, they like totalitarianism when it agrees with them... put simply, they only like things/people that agree with them.

Don't we all?
I agree with freedom except when I don't. I agree with capitalism except when I don't.