• Welcome to The Audio Annex! If you have any trouble logging in or signing up, please contact 'admin - at - theaudioannex.com'. Enjoy!
  • HTTPS (secure web browser connection) has been enabled - just add "https://" to the start of the URL in your address bar, e.g. "https://theaudioannex.com/forum/"
  • Congratulations! If you're seeing this notice, it means you're connected to the new server. Go ahead and post as usual, enjoy!
  • I've just upgraded the forum software to Xenforo 2.0. Please let me know if you have any problems with it. I'm still working on installing styles... coming soon.

The moral high ground to alter movies

I already know that VidAngel is not going to affect me Tom. I'm just saying what is if this is a stepping stone to a larger problem that one day may affect me. I just think if religious zealots are so concerned about nudity and swear words then maybe they shouldn't be wanting to watch rated R movies and stick to G rated movies. I've just rolled my eyes too many times listening to "Christians" talking about how sick and depraved tv and movies are. My solution is don't watch them then and quit preaching to us normal people who don't mind watching Attack of the stripper killer zombies
 
I am a little frustrated with your absolute terror of Christians who have their own morals which are different from yours.

What's wrong with different morals? We all have different levels of morality and ethics. Just because some of us developed our morality from a religious belief doesn't make those differences any better or any worse.

If you wanted to get up in arms over a new law removing nudity and foul language from all content being produced and thus taking it away from you, I would agree with you. But to get this fired up over a service to allow people to enjoy entertaining movies without the nudity or foul language isn't exactly removing your rights to watch the original versions of the movie.

That said, I really don't see how this service complies with copyright laws. I cannot imagine it will stand up in court.
 
I am a little frustrated with your absolute terror of Christians who have their own morals which are different from yours.

What's wrong with different morals? We all have different levels of morality and ethics. Just because some of us developed our morality from a religious belief doesn't make those differences any better or any worse.

If you wanted to get up in arms over a new law removing nudity and foul language from all content being produced and thus taking it away from you, I would agree with you. But to get this fired up over a service to allow people to enjoy entertaining movies without the nudity or foul language isn't exactly removing your rights to watch the original versions of the movie.

That said, I really don't see how this service complies with copyright laws. I cannot imagine it will stand up in court.

I am perfectly fine with people having morals, so long as they do not try to impose them on others.
 
I am sure you are okay with some amount of imposition. I mean, you are okay with the idea that the broadcasters cannot show full pornography at 6pm, when families are most likely to be watching, right?
 
I already know that VidAngel is not going to affect me Tom. I'm just saying what is if this is a stepping stone to a larger problem that one day may affect me.

You sound like a whiny &@$€# complaining about "what if". Buck-up and let the Puritans watch their edited movies.
 
It is not an infringement on your rights for a business to not sell something. An inconvenience, maybe, but hardly an infringement- you just have to find another avenue.

This isn't even an inconvenience if you don't use their service.
 
I am perfectly fine with people having morals, so long as they do not try to impose them on others.

Haywood hit the nail on the head. I could care less what Christians or any organization does in the privacy of their own home. Heck there could be a religion that has members screwing goats as their devotion what they do in their own homes is okay by me. What I mind is when any organization tries to install their beliefs and causing me to have abide by their moral ground when I didn't have a choice. I've used just two examples when the movie theaters were altering movies to please the Mormons even though I paid good money to see a rated R movie and I got PG-13 or when I rent Showgirls at Blockbuster and the good Nasty scenes have been edited.

My point is VidAngel is doing the same thing not to me but the studios who didn't authorize them to do this. The directors studio sued Blockbuster and won so they couldn't alter movies anymore. Not sure what happened at Mesa movie theaters but now I can't go to a theater close to my house because I'm not sure if the movie has been edited or not. Again a religious organization has caused me to alter what I want to do based on their beliefs and not mine and that's what I have an issue with. Apparently four major Hollywood studios take issue with it also as they are suing VidAngel.

It's a slippery slope.
 
I understand somewhat where you're coming from in regards to viewing new releases at a theater in which you paid money to see the studio's theatrical release. I'm just not seeing the correlation to this VidAngel business model and subsequent lawsuit. I'm surprised it's even a viable business model at all honestly...
 
I understand somewhat where you're coming from in regards to viewing new releases at a theater in which you paid money to see the studio's theatrical release. I'm just not seeing the correlation to this VidAngel business model and subsequent lawsuit. I'm surprised it's even a viable business model at all honestly...

Chris to me it's just a stepping stone. I've personally seen in the past what has happened when religious organizations try to infringe on others and yes I understand VidAngel is not infringing on my rights but what concerns me is why they keep trying to do this time and time again. Two out of three times they've done this I've been inconvenienced by their trying to purify what they deem sinful. It's not VidAngel that bothers me it's what may come next if they are successful and how it may affect me (again).

We had that one politicians wife in the 80's try to put a ratings label on hard rock as they didn't like the foul language on rock albums by groups like Twisted Sister ( wonder how they'd feel about rap lyrics today back then. Their constant complaining about the nudity and violence in movies (um it's why there is a rating system). My thought is if it's rated R then don't go. If I don't like a show or song I change the channel I'm not out protesting that music like rap be banned or edited because I know they're people out there that like it. Religious organizations though DO want to change things to their liking and don't care if we like it or not instead of them just changing the channel or I don't know maybe not seeing a rated R movie. Maybe I'm being xenophobic I just feel nobody should infringe on what others may enjoy
 
Chris to me it's just a stepping stone. I've personally seen in the past what has happened when religious organizations try to infringe on others and yes I understand VidAngel is not infringing on my rights but what concerns me is why they keep trying to do this time and time again. Two out of three times they've done this I've been inconvenienced by their trying to purify what they deem sinful. It's not VidAngel that bothers me it's what may come next if they are successful and how it may affect me (again).

We had that one politicians wife in the 80's try to put a ratings label on hard rock as they didn't like the foul language on rock albums by groups like Twisted Sister ( wonder how they'd feel about rap lyrics today back then. Their constant complaining about the nudity and violence in movies (um it's why there is a rating system). My thought is if it's rated R then don't go. If I don't like a show or song I change the channel I'm not out protesting that music like rap be banned or edited because I know they're people out there that like it. Religious organizations though DO want to change things to their liking and don't care if we like it or not instead of them just changing the channel or I don't know maybe not seeing a rated R movie. Maybe I'm being xenophobic I just feel nobody should infringe on what others may enjoy

While there are some fringe groups and one very powerful one in Utah, the vast majority of religious groups do NOT want to force you to not get access to your entertainment as it was created. I would argue it is a small minority of religious groups.
 
But we censor content all the time. We nearly all agree that there needs to be barriers to children getting to see R, NC-17, and X-rated content. We agree that TV channels who market themselves as being dedicated to children's programming should not show violent or adult content in the afternoon. We generally agree that a free-to-attend and family friendly neighborhood "movies in the park" night shouldn't show "Last Tango in Paris" unedited to a bunch of families and their young children. Those forms of censorship are not driven by religious groups and we accept that. Most of us understand the need to be sensitive to our developing children and sometimes to our elderly who haven't been exposed to the extreme stuff we consider normal for adults today. We can understand toning down our foul language while at Chuck-E-Cheese and holding back on the old-hooker's loose pussy jokes while at a pee-wee league baseball game. I even think we get that there is a time and place for everything and are generally willing to abide to social norms of public behavior, especially around vulnerable people.

However, if the "vulnerable person" happen to define their vulnerability by their religion, it seems that is not acceptable and a many feel they should be forced to be exposed to things they find offensive.

This shit goes both ways. Some people just prefer to limit images, language and ideas into their minds which they believe drags down their souls and makes them less happy or able to maintain their mental and emotional standards.

I am that way with angry rap - when it plays the music itself makes me anxious, mad, and triggers a fight or flight response in me (music is very powerful for me), so I do all I can to avoid it. When my stepson was living at home and blasting that music, I had to find a way to not hear it, either by asking him to turn it off/down, or blocking it with my own headphones playing music that didn't make me want to punch the next person I saw before cowering in a ball under the bed. While I haven't tried to eliminate that sort of music from society, I have made a conscious effort to avoid it, including leaving parties when it became apparent that music would be playing the entire time. That doesn't make me weak, narrow-minded, judgmental, or arrogant. I am not declaring I am better than everyone else because a form of art gives me feelings I would prefer not experience for enjoyment. However, many people take my avoidance of that music as judgment of them. Just like I used to take a ton of very serious verbal and even physical beatings for not drinking alcohol or doing drugs when around people doing them and insisting I join them. Why do we think that if someone else doesn't want to do, see, or hear the things we like that inherently they are judging us for their lack of participation?

I get that as an adult you should have the right to watch, listen, or talk about whatever you'd like (still within reason - child porn and snuff films should remain banned, right?). But someone trying to keep it out of their lives while not infringing on your ability to access it, that should be okay.

I mean, if you live in a community where 99% of the citizens would not buy a theater ticket to a NC-17 movie, the studio isn't likely to show that movie there and have empty seats when they could show a kids movie or a uplifting PG movie and sell loads of tickets. Yes, that makes your neighbors responsible for you having to drive 100 miles to see the more adult movie you want to see. But that doesn't make those people wrong for not wanting to go to a movie they find offensive. I don't expect to move to Japan and see a WW-II war movie portraying Japanese as the spawn of Satan and Americans as the saviors of the planet. So why should I expect to go to a very religious town and expect to see movies with extreme violence, language, nudity, and sex? That isn't taking away your rights, that's just economic forces.

This dog-whistle response to religious people who don't want to be exposed to things they think are offensive or emotionally demoralizing gets really tired. Sometimes what I need isn't easily available to me. That usually isn't censorship or a challenge to my rights.

I mean, we are talking about entertainment here, not water, clean air, medicine, food, housing, clothing, or anything necessary for life. Entertainment....
 
Matt, that Al's wife Tipper that was tied to the music labeling in the 90's. We could even throw Walmart into the mix for only selling PG rated music, and that's exactly why I won't buy much music at Walmart.
 
Matt - Do you even realize how insanely hypocritical your stance is?

You're outraged because a long time ago a group tried to limit what was available to you. Now you want to restrict what is made available to a group of people.

The funny thing about demanding that people tolerate you is that you have to tolerate them. You want access to an X rated movie store. You say if others don't like porn they don't have to watch it but they shouldn't stop you from watching it. Well, this other group wants to watch cleaned-up versions of movies. Yet you want to make sure they can't, even though them doing so impacts you in no way whatsoever.

IMHO, because of your position to totally deny even the ability to access content you forever lose (happy Zing?) any right to bitch about what you can't access.
 
I guess I just look at it in a different way then you guys do, being one whose rights were infringed by an organization that I had no desire to join. My best friends father is a prominent gynecologist in Mesa and owns his own clinic and when he first started he was visited by a "friendly" group of Mormons who basically told him that if he performed one single abortion at his clinic they would burn his clinic to the ground. Yes a religious group threatened this. So basically a fringe group with millions of members will infringe their beliefs on others to get their way. Which is why Mesa has no X rated shops and has theaters edit their movies. I understand VidAngel won't affect me but again what if this is a just a stepping stone to a bigger issue and this is what I take issue with.

To me it's as if one parent gets a school library to remove Tom Sawyer due to the language. Well great because one parent takes issue now all the kids can't read a classic assigned in school because of this. Wouldn't it just be easier to have that one parent refuse to have their own children read the book or do the assignment tied to the book instead of going on a crusade to ban the book.

I feel videos should be the same. The director and studio wanted the movie to have a nude scene or language or violence instead of trying to alter what the director wanted just don't watch the movie and the problem is solved.
 
But morman groups all over the nation go about their own lives every day without threatening gynecologists nor removing x-rated stores nor editing movies at the theater. You describe a bad situation, but that isn't some normal behavior.
 
Back
Top