Ditto. But "Platoon" was a hell of a lot closer to the mark than
either John Kerry

It's been 10 days since the election.
Get over it. :-)

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:36:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
CCred68046 wrote:
Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?

Its obvious. They could show that movie, its been on TV before. And it
could
have been edited for television easily.


I remember the movie well. I saw it in the theaters and I recall seeing
it on HBO, I believe. There's no reason to "edit" it for television, and
I believe ABC's deal with the studio forbids deletions.

What would you edit? The "cuss words"? They are integral to the movie.
The movie is violent, but no more so than other movies on television.

There's something else going on here.

Of course there's something else going on. You've got a bunch of "decency
advocates" bitching about language and family values. Meanwhile, they're too
busy writing letters and advocatin' and jerkin' off in a closet with their
bibles to simply find a way to keep their youngsters away from ABC for one
evening. If you don't want your kids to watch something, you arrange for
things to be that way. Period.

I have an idea for some of these people. They should be attached to the
ground at the ankle with a 25' chain, at the business end of a target
shooting range. Give 'em just enough chain to run around and avoid being
hit. We'll see what kind of language they use when the bullets are flying.
"Oh saints almighty! That was awful close!" Right.


Doug, you're not even close. But the above rant seems to be going off
the deep end somewhat.

Is there something wrong with being against foul language in front of
kids? If I had kids in the 10-14 year range, I'd like them to be able
to see the movie. I think they would get something out of it. I
*don't* think the use of "****in" as a constant adjective is necessary
to any movie. Hell, I get uncomfortable with nudity and "****" every
other word when watching a movie with my daughter in the room, and
she's 28 years old! (I guess that makes me *really* bad!)

What is wrong with having family values? What is wrong with being an
advocate for decency in family entertainment?

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On 12 Nov 2004 18:04:55 GMT, (Gould 0738) wrote:

Ditto. But "Platoon" was a hell of a lot closer to the mark than
either John Kerry

It's been 10 days since the election.
Get over it. :-)

Oh. You're 'right' of course!

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:51:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
.. .

Television is still over-reacting to the boob show at the
Superbowl.

Wanna hear something interesting? I can't assume my son's behavior (or
wisdom) is indicative of other kids, but I'll bet he's not that unusual.

A couple of years back, I had the flu. My excellent friend Mike stopped by
and handed me boxed sets of the first 3 years' of the Sopranos series. Then,
he ran away so he wouldn't get sick. A week later, I thanked him and said
I'd return them, but he said to pass them on to someone else who's nailed to
the couch with a fever. So, they're still here.

Recently, I decided my son was old enough to follow the series, so every so
often, we pop in a tape. If you've watched the show, you know there's an
occasional scene in the strip club, and actual, real genuine boobs are
shown. So, the first time, my son was somewhat riveted. The second time, we
were talking about fishing and he didn't skip a beat. At that point, I'm
sure he knew that any time we saw the front of the club, it was likely we'd
see tits. The third time, just as the girls were shown dancing, he got up
and says "I'm gettin' an apple. Ya want one?", and spent a minute washing
them. Didn't rush back in to make sure he wouldn't miss the tits.

After that episode, I said "If your mom finds out I let you watch this, I'm
in deep ****". He said "Watch what?" I said "This show". He said "What
show?" Then, he paused a moment and said "Besides, I don't know what the big
deal is. The nudity's not the point of the show. It's just where those guys
hang out." Later: "Tony's mother's really the center of the show so far.
Reminds me of grandma!*"

Kids should run the world.

*Grandma: The living, walking definition of the Yiddish word "schnorrer".
"Ma...someone sent me a box of Omaha steaks. We brought you a couple". Her:
"Oh please...those are way too fancy for me. I like the cube steaks....".
That's a schnorrer.


And your son was in his late 20's?

If he was an adolescent, and he wasn't interested in the boobs, then
he was either too embarrassed to let you know, or he's just not very
interested in females (IMHO).

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
news:2vinifF2lpnh4U1@uni-

Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?


LOS ANGELES, Nov. 11 (Xinhuanet) -- More than 20 ABC television
affiliates banned broadcasting the Hollywood war movie "Saving Private
Ryan" to mark the Veterans Day Thursday for fear that it could lead to
indecency fines.

Red Herring. Affiliate execs have acknowledged that they were not concerned
with violation fines, as Private Ryan had been shown before and was not at
issue. They were merely trying to make a political point to the FCC,
contending that the FCC responded to heavily to Janet Jackson's boob, et
al. -- in short, protesting that the country is trying to return to some
kind of standard, as opposed to none at all. So they did what broadcast
media almost always does when they want to make a point on their agenda.
They lied.

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:51:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

Kids should run the world.

Good lord no!!!!

*Grandma: The living, walking definition of the Yiddish word "schnorrer".
"Ma...someone sent me a box of Omaha steaks. We brought you a couple". Her:
"Oh please...those are way too fancy for me. I like the cube steaks....".
That's a schnorrer.

LOL!!

Knew quite a few of those growing up.

Later,

Tom

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:51:56 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in
message
.. .

Television is still over-reacting to the boob show at the
Superbowl.

Wanna hear something interesting? I can't assume my son's behavior (or
wisdom) is indicative of other kids, but I'll bet he's not that unusual.

A couple of years back, I had the flu. My excellent friend Mike stopped
by
and handed me boxed sets of the first 3 years' of the Sopranos series.
Then,
he ran away so he wouldn't get sick. A week later, I thanked him and said
I'd return them, but he said to pass them on to someone else who's nailed
to
the couch with a fever. So, they're still here.

Recently, I decided my son was old enough to follow the series, so every
so
often, we pop in a tape. If you've watched the show, you know there's an
occasional scene in the strip club, and actual, real genuine boobs are
shown. So, the first time, my son was somewhat riveted. The second time,
we
were talking about fishing and he didn't skip a beat. At that point, I'm
sure he knew that any time we saw the front of the club, it was likely
we'd
see tits. The third time, just as the girls were shown dancing, he got up
and says "I'm gettin' an apple. Ya want one?", and spent a minute washing
them. Didn't rush back in to make sure he wouldn't miss the tits.

After that episode, I said "If your mom finds out I let you watch this,
I'm
in deep ****". He said "Watch what?" I said "This show". He said "What
show?" Then, he paused a moment and said "Besides, I don't know what the
big
deal is. The nudity's not the point of the show. It's just where those
guys
hang out." Later: "Tony's mother's really the center of the show so far.
Reminds me of grandma!*"

Kids should run the world.

*Grandma: The living, walking definition of the Yiddish word "schnorrer".
"Ma...someone sent me a box of Omaha steaks. We brought you a couple".
Her:
"Oh please...those are way too fancy for me. I like the cube steaks....".
That's a schnorrer.


And your son was in his late 20's?

If he was an adolescent, and he wasn't interested in the boobs, then
he was either too embarrassed to let you know, or he's just not very
interested in females (IMHO).

He wasn't raised by a television like so many other kids. He prefers
reality. I won't take THAT thought any further at the moment, but you know
what I mean.

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:36:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
CCred68046 wrote:
Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War
II?

Its obvious. They could show that movie, its been on TV before. And
it
could
have been edited for television easily.


I remember the movie well. I saw it in the theaters and I recall seeing
it on HBO, I believe. There's no reason to "edit" it for television,
and
I believe ABC's deal with the studio forbids deletions.

What would you edit? The "cuss words"? They are integral to the movie.
The movie is violent, but no more so than other movies on television.

There's something else going on here.

Of course there's something else going on. You've got a bunch of "decency
advocates" bitching about language and family values. Meanwhile, they're
too
busy writing letters and advocatin' and jerkin' off in a closet with
their
bibles to simply find a way to keep their youngsters away from ABC for
one
evening. If you don't want your kids to watch something, you arrange for
things to be that way. Period.

I have an idea for some of these people. They should be attached to the
ground at the ankle with a 25' chain, at the business end of a target
shooting range. Give 'em just enough chain to run around and avoid being
hit. We'll see what kind of language they use when the bullets are
flying.
"Oh saints almighty! That was awful close!" Right.


Doug, you're not even close. But the above rant seems to be going off
the deep end somewhat.

Is there something wrong with being against foul language in front of
kids? If I had kids in the 10-14 year range, I'd like them to be able
to see the movie. I think they would get something out of it. I
*don't* think the use of "****in" as a constant adjective is necessary
to any movie. Hell, I get uncomfortable with nudity and "****" every
other word when watching a movie with my daughter in the room, and
she's 28 years old! (I guess that makes me *really* bad!)

What is wrong with having family values? What is wrong with being an
advocate for decency in family entertainment?

There's NOTHING wrong with "family values". In this case, it doesn't mean
you criticize a network for showing a movie that depicts the way soldiers
actually behave. That's bull****. What it means is that you don't let your
kids watch the movie. If you want them to see an accurate movie about war,
without certain kinds of language, there are plenty to choose from. Let them
watch "Bridge Over the River Kwai", for example. Or, "Das Boot".

On Fri, 12 Nov 2004 17:36:04 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
CCred68046 wrote:
Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?

Its obvious. They could show that movie, its been on TV before. And it
could
have been edited for television easily.


I remember the movie well. I saw it in the theaters and I recall seeing
it on HBO, I believe. There's no reason to "edit" it for television, and
I believe ABC's deal with the studio forbids deletions.

What would you edit? The "cuss words"? They are integral to the movie.
The movie is violent, but no more so than other movies on television.

There's something else going on here.

Of course there's something else going on. You've got a bunch of "decency
advocates" bitching about language and family values. Meanwhile, they're too
busy writing letters and advocatin' and jerkin' off in a closet with their
bibles to simply find a way to keep their youngsters away from ABC for one
evening. If you don't want your kids to watch something, you arrange for
things to be that way. Period.

I have an idea for some of these people. They should be attached to the
ground at the ankle with a 25' chain, at the business end of a target
shooting range. Give 'em just enough chain to run around and avoid being
hit. We'll see what kind of language they use when the bullets are flying.
"Oh saints almighty! That was awful close!" Right.

You are partly right of course.

But.....

It really has to do with a chicken **** gutless FCC who reacts to
complaints from advocate groups about strong language and nekkid
bodies. If Michael Powell and his merry band of Republican and
Democrat sycophants had any guts, this would never reach the light of
day. That's where the TV culture war is being waged. Unfortunately,
nobody but me seems to see it that way.

The FCC is led by a gutless mensch who got his job through political
connections and it shows.

Later,

Tom

"We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it."

Now are the restraint devices in front of your tv leather or chains? I
was just wondering the comfort level of the children and people in your
household while they are "Forced" to watch these shows.

Come to think of it I don't like spinich. So be a dear and go throw
yours out.

Bottom line if ya don't like it don't watch it. The tv execs would not
put anything on the does not make a profit. They only put shows on that
the majority wants to see. If a show offends you CHANGE THE CHANNEL that
is your right but don't try to come into my house and steal my remote.

Dave Hall wrote:
On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 22:04:45 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:


Is this where we are heading? Fear of showing a classy movie that
depicts the doggedness and bravery of our soldiers during World War II?



This is nothing more than a case of paranoia. Many TV execs are
nervous following the backlash from the FCC in the wake of that stupid
Janet Jackson stunt. The FCC made no comments about what it would do
for the "Ryan" movie specifically. It's just that the companies are
now more conscious of the consequences of going over the line.

I find it comforting that the gradual erosion of the limits of what we
consider to be material "not meant for TV" has been halted to some
degree.

We were not far from a point where naked people and graphic violence
would have been flashed on prime time TV, where children and other
people would be subject to it.

If the people who provide our entertainment cannot come up with shows
that do not have to rely on either graphic and gratuitous sex or
violence in order to gain popularity, then I would suggest they all
retire and find some more talented writers. They were around in great
numbers 40 years ago....

Dave