Saving Private Ryan

[The Captain]

Though it's airing right now on my local ABC station, many have decided not to carry it since it will not be censored. What's your take on this?

In my opinion, films such as these lose all of their power and pathos when they are censored. If parents are afraid of exposing their family to such violence and language, they always have the option of not tuning in, but in actuality, films like Saving Private Ryan, in my opinion give a very realistic view of what war is like and rather than shield children from this, parents should sit down and watch it with them, explaining to them exactly what they're seeing, if they decide their kids can handle it.

Take care all.

[Venom65437]

I agree with you, but too few people want to parent their own kids nowadays, so they go out of the way to make sure everything else does it for them.

It isn't asking much to turn the channel or just not let your kid watch it.

Parent your own kids people!!!

[Shoeberto]

Agreed, Venom.

They're not showing it on my local ABC. They're showing Born on the Fourth of July, apparantly. Damn conservative bastards - I really wanted to watch it.

[Dingo Jellybean]

They only showed it on my local ABC because I live in the 4th largest market in the United States. It was mainly economical, because for the many people who won't watch it...there are a lot who will anyways.

PS: I always read the title as "Saving Ryan's Privates"...damn MadTV.

[Necronopticous]

Though it's airing right now on my local ABC station, many have decided not to carry it since it will not be censored. What's your take on this?

In my opinion, films such as these lose all of their power and pathos when they are censored. If parents are afraid of exposing their family to such violence and language, they always have the option of not tuning in, but in actuality, films like Saving Private Ryan, in my opinion give a very realistic view of what war is like and rather than shield children from this, parents should sit down and watch it with them, explaining to them exactly what they're seeing, if they decide their kids can handle it.

Take care all.

You're absolutely right. Sheltering your children will only hurt them more in the long run. The thing about films like Saving Private Ryan in general is that it's not about something violent and vulgar that happens on the starsystem phebos 400,000 light years away from earth, it's something that's going on all the time, all over the world. War is very real and I think the idea of sheltering and lying to your children about how real it actually is just makes way for it. It has the ability to breed war, people like to think "my son is going to serve his country and fight off evil in the world" rather than "my son is going to go kill people and might very well be killed himself"

Anyway, Saving Private Ryan, as well as many other graphic films, carrys a very important message. The thing is that the message lays within the violence and within the graphic nature of it, taking it away is asinine and counterproductive.

[Zell's Fists of Fury]

We got 'Hoosiers'.

...wtf
They adverteised it and everything.

[theundeadhero]

I agree with the station playing it uncensored.

I agree that parents should decide what's okay for their kids to watch.

I disagree that parents should let little kids watch a movie like Saving Private Ryan. As little kids they should be kept from seeing those kinds of things untili they are older and better able to understand the situation. Now, stopping a 13 year old from watching it is a different story.

[DeBlayde]

an interesting effect of sheltering the small children, though, is for that child to grow up, look at the world around them and think, geez. this world's going to hell in a hand basket. (No, not Coldest Hel, the nasty unpleasant hell) When I was a kid, things weren't so bad.

Things have always been bad. As the world grows smaller with technology, we're face to face with the bad-ness of the world. Sheltering a kid is necessary if you don't want the poor thing to have nightmares. I only point out an interesting effect that seems to come from it.

if I may be so forward as to present on opinion, I think the primary responsibility of a parent after protecting the child is to prepare that child for the world. world = dangerous. the strong prey on the weak and on those who don't pay attention.

[Zell's Fists of Fury]

Does anyone remember when NBC showed Schindler's List unedited (nuidity, violence, language, the works), years ago? Why is it so different now?

[edczxcvbnm]

The stations that didn't air didn't air it because they were afraid of FCC fines.

I wouldn't expose my kids to it...if I had any. Too young to really understand or care. If they are old enough then they have probably already heard every bad word and the all I have to do is explain the violence...which is a piece of cake. "Humanity is stupid"

EDIT: Its different now spiff because Janet showed her booby I also remember when they showed the List...because I have it on tape with the propagand breaks included

[-N-]

ABC's got balls showing uncensored Ryan Thursday night. I was just watching it, and it definitely. It was shocking and gruesome and grotesque and all that stuff...

[Miriel]

The thing is, even if parents aren't there to supervise what their children watch, what normal kid would choose to watch Saving Private Ryan over Spongebob or Lizzie McGuire?

Kids who are too young to be watching Saving Private Ryan aren't interested in watching the movie.

I hate it when people overreact =/

And an interesting side note about the movie, when Steven Spielberg first brought the movie for review he was fully anticipating a NC-17 rating, and he wasn't going to argue it. But the MPAA felt that it was important for as many people as possible to watch this movie and they didn't want to limit the movie by giving it a NC-17 rating (which really is the kiss of death when it comes to movie ratings).

Movies by the way are rated by a panel of judges who have no connection to the movie industry and whose real jobs range from Algebra teacher to hair stylist with the only requirement being that you *must* be a parent in order to be a judge for the MPAA. I dunno, I'm extremely grateful that the government doesn't have control over movie ratings (unlike the vice-like grip they have on television censorship).

[theundeadhero]

When I was a kid I would've watched it if my parents weren't home and I had the chance. Simply because I wasn't allowed to and seeing all this "bad" kind of stuff would hold my interest. Than again I was never left home alone as a little kid.

[fire_of_avalon]

Many ABC affiliates chose not to air it because they hadn't gotten the necessary FCC approval, and would have had to pay enormous fines if they had (six figure numbers). Many affiliates, mostly smaller ones, simply cannot afford that to air one movie.

However, check this. The reason they couldn't garner FCC approval this time is because the time it was aired in 2001 and 2002 was prior to the Janet Jackson "wardrobe malfunction" scandal at the '03 Superbowl halftime show. Since then, the FCC has been under and incredible amount of fire for "allowing" things such as this to "happen", and as a result, they've become much much stricter than they used to be (which is pretty ironic, as they've always carried some of the toughest guidelines to manipulate).

So, it's Janet Jackson's fault. :rolleyes2 Not at all the parents who should monitor what their children view.

I honestly hope the members of this forum procreate to a huge extent and change some of the screwed up values of this world.