Good V Bad: Films and Parenting

"Torture Porn" - For Kids (or Anyone)?

There was a piece on the Victoria derbyshire Show on Radio 5 Live this morning about "reception class" children in infants school (ages circa 4 or 5 years old) playing violent video games (Grand Theft Auto and Call of Duty). These games tend to be rated 15 or 18 and do contain some extreme violence.

Without going into details of the where and when (or even the gender), I know of a child in a reception class who is so young/immature that he/she still wears a nappy. Yet this child regularly "effs and blinds" in class.

One cannot blame all the ills in society on bad parenting, but there is no doubt that bad, sloppy, lazy or similar parenting is to blame for a good proportion of what is wrong in society.

In recent days there has been a lot of discussion of violence in the media because of the 14 year old boy who killed his mother and set fire to her afterwards. He was 'hooked' on violence in films and on TV.

Now let me put my cards on the line. I enjoy films, and these include psychological thrillers, murder mysteries and similar. I also played with Action Man toys, toy soldiers and played 'British and Germans' in the playground when we (teeny lads) would pretend to have pistols or machine guns and run around shooting each other, dying in agony (imagine the theatricals!) only to be brought back to life if a comrade-in-arms got to you.

So what am I trying to say? Well, I think boys will always be boys (and some girls will always be tomboys), and playing 'war games' is as old as the hills; but I also think parents have a duty to teach their children right from wrong. A percentage may always choose the wrong things as they grow older; but if parents take an active role in promoting good values (anchored in the Ten Commandments, for example) then at least children have a fighting chance of not being quite so bad as they grow up.

We all of us know that working through school and in jobs (whether offices or factories) you bump along with some rum characters, and so very few us live in a bubble. Nor should we, unless we wish to be a hermit.

But we should at least give children the protection they deserve, and the values that can help them in life; even if they decide (of their own free will) to jettison those values when they are older.

It's akin to a wooden ship sinking. We could let it sink and hope for the best, knowing that some will cling to the flotsam and jetsam, or we can fling a load of life-saving 'rubber rings' in, knowing that it could help even more people survive. Giving children a decent upbringing, teaching them right from wrong, shielding them from horror films, porn and foul language, can't ensure they are perfect as adults, but it is a good start, and will lessen the odds of losing more further down the road.

I think that is why some Catholic writers I've read articles by, blame lax catechetics by the Church on the number of cradle Catholics who drift away from their Faith. Good foundations protect against subsidence later on.

As I supped my lunchtime cup of tea today I heard Jeremy Vine on the radio saying the murder by the 14-year-old was somehow linked to the Saw movies. Now I have never seen one of these movies, they just don't appeal to me at all. In some quarters (e.g. film critics) they are known as "torture porn" and Mr. Vine said that the theme of these movies was turned on its head because in them the bloke doing the torturing held all the power. At least in more traditional "horror" films the bad guys got their comeuppance and the good guys won. In many of them the good guys also happened to be Catholic priests or in some way sanctioned by the Catholic Church. So there was some sense of 'good v evil' and good winning.

As I said I have never (and hope never to) see a Saw movie, but the lines delineating good and evil seem blurred, to say the least. Besides which, surely even with the best will in the world and even with 'scarey' films that play the good v evil, Church v Satan, Priest v possession (etc.) themes, these are meant for grown-ups only!

I think the films The Rite and The Exorcism of Emily Rose are very good, and contain valid Catholic themes, and portray a battle of good versus evil that can take the complacent person and make them realise that just as there is a God, so there is an evil being called Satan ("who roams the world for the ruin of souls" to quote the Leo XIII prayer to St Michael).

But the idea of showing such films to children is a no-no, because they have some disturbing images, frightening sequences and suchlike.

The riots in London were blamed on bad parenting, which came as no real surprise to anyone with more than an ounce of intelligence. Liberals, atheists, 60s hippies and professional social workers may wish otherwise, but we need good parenting in this country (mums and dads!), and without that children miss out on the fundamentals, whether it is teaching your children that smashing shops up is wrong, that swearing is wrong, that watching or playing games that are for an older age group is wrong, just as much as eating nothing but crisps and sweets and drinking fizzy pop all day is wrong.

Those parents who allow their children to eat and drink rubbish all day cannot be surprised when their teeth rot or they get obese. Those who don't may still get 'cavities' or grow chubby and those who do may by sheer chance get through unscathed, but the battle to protect their teeth and health is nonetheless important and it is a parent's duty to step in, say "no" when necessary and put up with any strops and tantrums that happen along the way.

Similarly those parents who do not shield their children from foul language, porn, horror films etc. cannot be surprised when their children grow up to be obnoxious, nasty or foul.

It's going to be a battle against the odds anyway given the modern world, given the people in our schools, colleges, workplaces and in the streets. It's going to be a hard slog against the tide given the media, adverts in the streets, films, magazines etc.

But to surrender at the start and give children full access to bad materials and bad influences is not just sloppy and lazy parenting: it's evil parenting. And I would think that kind of parenting is now reaping the whirlwind it has sown.

What Makes a Catholic Church Catholic?

I was chatting to a friend the other day and we started discussing films and TV series, and we got onto those with Catholic themes: typically redemption, wages of sin, forgiveness and so on.

Of course there are some great Catholic films out there. And some less well known. Some of my favourites, for different reasons, are The Exorcism of Emily Rose, The Mission, and Braveheart. Others are famous for carrying Catholic messages such as The Exorcist and Clockwork Orange.

One thing that strikes me about films and TV series is that when they want to put across a truly spiritual feeling, whether it is someone needing a place of prayer and sanctuary, whether it is an exorcism, or whether it is a family funeral -- more often than not they will use "old school" Catholicism. You know - "smells and bells."

There will be statues of Our Lord, Our Lady and the Saints. There will be stained-glass windows. There will be lots of lit candles. There will be a high altar. If a priest is present he will have traditional vestments, or be all in black with dog collar.

Yesterday I watched a Spanish film called 'Rec 2' and it featured images of Our Lady, First Communions  etc. - all thoroughly traditional. And today I watched Stuart Little 2 and in it the eponymous hero flies a plane into a group of nuns - all in the "full regalia" with rosaries.

Why?

I have come to one conclusion and that is that producers, writers, directors and various execs are no fools. They know what sells and they know what carries an audience.

"Fr Bobby" in a Marks n Spencer's pullover singing Kum-by-ya in a hollowed-out Roller Disco with a modern art cross and a table with a chair behind it, does not convey religion, spirituality, grace and faith.

These people are not idiots. They may not be Catholics. They may even be vaguely or overtly anti-Catholic. But they know that when a film calls for a spiritual presence, for the power, presence and strength of 2000 years of Christ's Faith -- you cannot beat the feel, look, presence and ambiance of a traditional Catholic Church.

It's very look screams out faith, forgiveness, prayer, sacrifice.

We all know it. We all feel it. That is why film-makers use it to convey that inner feeling. If they used a roller-disco 'church' they would have to work harder elsewhere to make it feel 'spiritual' and even then could fail miserably.

So why, given this is self-evident and obvious, does the Church not recognise this?

Over 1,950 years the Church perfected its Churches. The altars. The statues. The windows. The very feel of a Church would immediately raise your mind and soul to Heaven. The feel of a roller-disco 'church' makes your mind wonder "is it fish fingers for tea?"

Why do you think the Protestants went out of their way to replace the altars, whitewash the murals, pull down the statues? They knew this was the way to undermine the Catholic Faith of the (ex-)faithful.

We are frail and failing humans -- even the very best of us (i.e. the Saints). That is why we need all the help we can get. The Church knew this. That is why they perfected their Churches. They helped us focus on the Sacrificial nature of the Mass, the Real Presence of Our Lord, the history of the Church, the Militant, Suffering and Triumphant parts of the Mystical Body of Christ, and so on.

Is it coincidence that so many people have fallen away from the Church since Altars were replaced by tables? No I don't mean at the 16th Century "Reformation" - I mean in the 1970s. And the Altar Rails removed? And roller-discos erected? And the Liturgy and Vestments changed? I don't think so.

Why is the Catholic hierarchy so slow to recognise what even Hollywood directors (and look at the circles they move in!) know to be true?

The "Spirit of Renewal" has emptied the pews and wrecked many churches.

How long before this lesson is learnt?

Cristiada: Andy Garcia and Eva Longoria in a Film About the Catholic Mexican Cristeros

Andy Garcia in Cristiada

Like the Passion of the Christ, I hope this film will show the true heroism of the Faith and the evil, twisted hate of our demonic-influenced enemies, from those Pharisees who caused the crowd to shout "Free Barabbas" to the Masonic movements today who seek to shut down the Catholic Church or limit its influence via "human rights" legislation "hate laws" and similar.

The more times change, the more they remain the same.

Today,we do not see churches barricaded, priests banned from wearing clerical garb outside churches, armies turned against the Faithful. No.

But the Masonic war against God and His Holy Catholic Church goes on.

Priests have been bamboozled into 'choosing' not to wear clerical garb and so we see "Father Richard" shopping in Tescos in his Hawaiian shirt and Bermuda shorts (and sandals, of course). Today we see the Mass of All Time banned purely because Catholics have to jump through hoops to get to it and most Diocese officials ensure it is not freely available (despite the reported wishes of the Pope). And the armies? Well we see armies of lawyers and politicians using Masonic-EU laws to shut down Catholic adoption agencies. How long before Catholic schools are forced to teach anti-Catholic lessons (condoms, evolution, homosexuality)? Oh wait. They (or some) are already.

No we don't have recusants, apart from those who have to seek out semi-secret Latin Masses. No we don't have priest-hunters, apart from the lawyers who look for any chink of sound Catholic social and moral teaching outside of the weekly homily. We don't have Churches bulldozed -- because the 1970s saw that and now we have so many churches that look like roller-discos.

The Mexican Masonic government fought against our Faith, and the Cristeros rose up in heroic counter-revolution.

The powers-that-be have learnt the lessons. You can destroy a Faith through insidious means far more effectively than by open warfare. The click of a TV on-button is to be feared more than a click of a gun. Today's Catholics just "go with the flow" and so the Masons have (seemingly, temporarily) won.

Oh for heroism. Oh for Martyrs. Oh for the Rights of Christ the King!

The Rite: An Honest Film Review by a (Welsh) Catholic

Braveheart: Is it cos I is Welsh? And who nicked Stirling Bridge?

Last Sunday I (and two young accomplices) attended my local multiplex 'World of Cine' to partake in the cinematic feast that is The Rite, starring that Welsh screen presence, Sir Anthony Hopkins.

Having purchased the tickets and carefully avoided the temptations of the foyer (i.e. overpriced sweets, hot dogs and sticky drinks) we hastened to take our seats, a mere 15 minutes early. Sorry, I mean half an hour early: don't you just loathe cinema adverts? And don't even get me started on trailers that give the entire story of forthcoming films away! I mean come on! I'm not American - neither do I watch Eastenders. You can advertise a film without showing me all the pertinent twists and turns.

I shouldn't even mention the highly suspect advert for a male deodorant with the tag-line "Angels will fall." Ridiculous.

 So onto the film.

What to make of it?

Well, this film suffers from what I shall call 'the curse of Braveheart.'

Yes, Mel Gibson, the Catholic who falls on his way to his own Calvary (just like the rest of us), made a wonderful film that really captured the imagination (especially in Scotland!) and certainly showed the faults of Scotland (and Ireland and Wales) in that cowardice, treachery, greed and heroism were present in equal share.

Yes we saw the heroic Scottish Hero Wallace (Catholic & Welsh: Wallace means "Welshman" most likely descended from the Welsh kingdom of Strathclyde) lay down his very life for his country, but in the shadow of the film the gainsayers were quick to quip: 'but it's inaccurate.'

The Battle of Stirling Bridge (the topic of the Corries quite superb song of the same name), was bridgeless! The idea that the Queen of England's daughter was Wallace's. All this and more stretched the credibility and plausibility of a genuinely moving and heroic story.

What were we to believe? Did Wallace kill the traitor Lords? Did the Irish mercenaries switch sides to join the Scots? We (unless we are experts, unless we take a year off to read all the history books, or unless - and this is stretching it a wee bit - we were there) just can't say for sure what was fact and what was a bit of Hollywood license.

We can try to make educated guesses, but what then of the uneducated viewer? Will he dismiss it all as a story with a mere toe dipped in the truth? Or will he swallow it whole just as some people think all homosexuals are loving, caring, monogamous etc. following storylines from TV soap operas?

And therein lies the problem for The Rite.

I enjoyed the film, and as so often is the case with a good film, enjoy the cinematography, the scenes in which the action is set etc. Just seeing the Vatican and Rome in a film that isn't wildly anti-Catholic was a treat, albeit just a glimpse now and then of the Mass would have been "nice" -- but that's not to detract from the wonderful Catholic 'feel' of the film.

My problem however is going away and wondering "was that bit real/true."

I won't give too much away in case you haven't seen the film yet, but there is a major part of the film in which (let's say) a 'famous' person is possessed by a demon (Baal I believe). Now I know the actual person the film character is based on, and I'm sure I'd have read somewhere, or heard from someone if he had been possessed.

It just left me wondering too much and, for me, undermined the premise of a quite wonderful film with a powerful message: i.e. that Satan does exist (and thus proves the existence of God).

The priest, on whose story the film is based (Fr G Thomas), says that all the film is spot on, bar his character being a deacon and having doubts about the Faith. Which leaves me wondering if much else in the film was an absolute faithful transcript of events (some of the 'happenings' being quite extraordinary).

So,all in all I would give the film a thumbs up. It is enjoyable. It does make you think. It may convert the occasional soul. The last image of a Catholic going to Confession was very powerful.

But, personally, I would have preferred a powerful Catholic film without the 'opt out' available to atheists etc. of "most of it isn't true."

Despite my "purist" grumblings I would still give it a healthy 9 out of 10, and before chatting through the pros and cons of the film (so as not to cloud their judgement) my two young minders (helping me avoid any elderly stumbles on uneven floors) gave it 9 out of 10 too.

Two Things to Look Out For:

• The Welsh writing/graffiti on the wall in the final exorcism scenes.
• The moving last rites scene as the girl on the bicycle dies.

Plans For the Weekend? Go See Anthony Hopkins in The Rite

The Rite, released tomorrow in the UK

We are making plans to see the new Anthony Hopkins film The Rite this weekend, so I'm quite excited.

I think my eldest is more frightened of being seen out in public with his poor old dad than any scenes in the film ;-). No, he's a good lad really.

Quite a few people have popped by this blog on searching for info on the film, its star and the relevance of Catholicism to both.

I'm sure it won't be to the extent of The Passion of the Christ, but as I always say when the power of the film industry can be used to promote Catholicism and Catholic Truths, then more souls will be prompted to seek out the Truth.

In a world of chaotic opinions and instant "experts" I do believe Catholics should promote their Faith with the talents God has given them.

Watch this space for a review.


P.S. Why is it in this review of the film, the person who pours cold water on the fact of diabolical possession is "John Allen, writing in the National Catholic Reporter?" As many faithful Catholics have said, Satan's agenda is to make people think he doesn't exist, therefore allowing atheism and false pride to rise (witness modern society).As the review itself states:

Above all the young man grapples with what Fr. Lucas keeps repeating: to disbelieve the devil is what the devil wants. C.S. Lewis, writing in “The Screwtape Letters”  (1942), states this well: “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them. They themselves are equally pleased by both errors and hail a materialist or a magician with the same delight.”

New Film out Soon: The Rite, Starring Anthony Hopkins

An interesting new film is out late February (it's already out in America).



This film looks like a must for Catholics aged 15 and over.



I had to put these trailers up after reading an interview with the priest (Fr G Thomas - sounds Welsh!) on the sublime Linen on the Hedgerow blog. The link with the Vatican exorcist Fr. Amorth means a solid Catholicism is assured in these matters and when Fr Thomas says the film is in all essentials true to his book, which is factual, then we can look forward to an interesting film (perhaps in the vein of The Exorcism of Emily Rose).



P.S. Anthony Hopkins: now he is Welsh! ;-)

Parents Beware: BBFC 12 Film Ratings are a Farce

It is self-evident that the classification of films by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) has changed over the years. Anyone who thinks otherwise needs simply to cast their mind back to X-Rated films of yesteryear and compare them to 12 and 15 rated films today.

Now I am no prude, I have worked in warehouses, offices and other work environments, and I have heard bad language. I don't approve of its use in normal conversation, it portrays a lack of vocabulary if nothing else, but I can understand the odd usage of 'Anglo-Saxon' when someone hurts them self, even if we should try to avoid such things if we are trying to better ourselves.

At the same time we all know that far too many Hollywood films are littered with foul language and blasphemy -- much of it totally unnecessary to any plot line. Its usage seems quite facetious, as if the people who plan these things like to "shock" the audience or underpin a film's authenticity by littering it with foul words.

Listening to a BBC film review show the other day, I followed some interesting points that brought home not only how much the BBFC ratings have changed since I was a boy, but how ridiculous those ratings are today and have little relevance to the films (especially in regards to what parents should let their children see).

See if you think the following makes sense.

A cartoon film, Marmaduke, with the rating U (available to all) was told by the BBFC that it would be given a rating of 12, unless it removed one slang word for disability.

Meanwhile The Hole in 3D is a 12 film, and grown men are saying it is scary, including a child with bleeding eyes, and one person phoned the BBC to say his children had had nightmares ever since seeing the film.

What I guess I'm trying to ask is how can Marmaduke almost be a 12 when something as scary as The Hole in 3D is a 12 (I have little doubt that back in the 70s or 80s it would have been X-rated).

I haven't see The Hole in 3D so I'm only going by what the BBC presenters and audience were saying.

But one 12 film I did see which shocked me was The Dark Knight. With strong violence, knives held to mouths and more, it was clearly an adult thriller that would easily have been X-rated in the past.

The worrying thing is that the 12 rating is a guideline, so parents can take young children in with them if they see fit, which is fine if Marmaduke was given a 12 rating, but for films such as The Hole in 3D or The Dark Knight, this is a nonsense.

Hollywood likes to tell us that bad films don't make bad people, that they are simply reflecting society at large. This is an argument easily shot down in flames because many thriller and horror films carry unreal violence and extreme situations, albeit portrayed in a real and frightening way.

Plus they miss the point, which is that the innocence of our children is being lost far too easily and at a far too early age. It is terrible when you read of young children being allowed to view horror and porn, and all the psychological problems that can bring, not least lawlessness and a sense of amorality.

Yet it is a nonsensical situation when official guidelines allow parents, even those who assiduously follow such guidelines to do the best for their children, to take children of 8 or 9 (or even younger) to see films as scary as the Dark Knight or as horrifying as The Hole in 3D.

I don't think we, as a society, should accept this status quo when the possibility to do harm to the young is so obvious.