The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent
"A Single Man" (beware spoilers)
louisev:
--- Quote from: Sason on March 10, 2010, 03:24:39 pm ---You're welcome!
Just PM me, and I'll try to find something useful for you.
--- End quote ---
will do! And yes, the "Rotterdam" sailed from Rotterdam mostly, and occasionally from Amsterdam or Niew Amsterdam. But I cant find any passenger manifests for 1914 through 1917.
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: Sason on March 10, 2010, 03:23:24 pm ---Rotterdam is a whole different thing. I thought you meant she was lucky to get out of Sweden, which didn't make much sense in the war-context.
--- End quote ---
Oh, no! I'm sorry if I confused you!
Front-Ranger:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on March 09, 2010, 10:33:07 pm ---But don't you agree that there are some differences between a book that you give to your kids, and a movie that they might try to see without you?
For one thing, you already knew what was in Catcher in the Rye before you gave it to your kids. I'm sure most people couldn't say that about this movie. After all, you're a lot more culturally aware, FRiend Lee, than an awful lot of American parents.
--- End quote ---
All the more reason why it should be rated PG, for Parental Guidance, Jeff. A Single Man should not have an R, for Restricted, rating, because there are many teens (I'm thinking all would be of driving age except for a few in New York or San Francisco, say) who might WANT to see it and SHOULD see it, whether their parents want them to or not. Why? For historical, literary or film scholarship, for example. Also, because they're gay and want to understand what gay life was like in the '60s. Or because they're depressed, or getting over a lost love. Perhaps they admire the work of Christopher Isherwood. There are myriad reasons.
I don't think elementary aged children should see the movie because of the disturbing image of George brandishing a gun when he is contemplating suicide. That's the only reason.
For an interesting, though short, topic on What Movies Would Have Been Better Without the MPAA Board, go here.
Sason:
--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on March 10, 2010, 04:07:41 pm ---Oh, no! I'm sorry if I confused you!
--- End quote ---
Don't worry. It's all right! :)
Jeff Wrangler:
--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on March 10, 2010, 04:31:44 pm ---All the more reason why it should be rated PG, for Parental Guidance, Jeff. A Single Man should not have an R, for Restricted, rating, because there are many teens (I'm thinking all would be of driving age except for a few in New York or San Francisco, say) who might WANT to see it and SHOULD see it, whether their parents want them to or not. Why? For historical, literary or film scholarship, for example. Also, because they're gay and want to understand what gay life was like in the '60s. Or because they're depressed, or getting over a lost love. Perhaps they admire the work of Christopher Isherwood. There are myriad reasons.
--- End quote ---
I think you're ascribing far too much sophistication to the average under-17 crowd. And I want to emphasize the word average, because I think that's important in this context.
I'm not a parent, and even I know most teenagers are not historians or literary or film scholars, nor do they care about life in the 1960s, gay or otherwise. And as for even having heard of Christopher Isherwood--are you kidding?
The few to whom any of the above qualifications may apply, well, they'll just have to wait a little. The movie will still be available. Or they'll find a way to see it on line, or on DVD when it's available, which it surely will be before very long. They're not going to be harmed by not being able to see it in a theater.
Ratings address the many and the average, not the extraordinary few.
And I've been thinking as I've read the outrage over the rating, there is a flip side to this: Would you have wanted to watch this film with a gaggle of giggling teenagers seated in the row right behind you? I rather suspect not. Perhaps the "R" rating helped to keep out teens who may have seen something about this film on TV and decided to go to it just to gape and giggle at the queer on the screen.
This sort of thing does happen. I had to put up with it many years ago when I saw Making Love in a theater.
I've also been wondering whether anyone knows for fact that the rating was based on the gay theme, or whether someone just jumped to a conclusion? I'm not trying to insult anyone by asking that question: I'm not following news about this film, so I mean the question seriously, and I think it's a legitimate question to ask. We just had a terrible teen double-suicide in the Philadelphia suburbs; maybe that suicide angle had something to do with the rating?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version