So Not a Surprise

In a recent issue of Life Site News, Angela O'Brien reported on the results of a study conducted by Dr. Ross O'Hara at Darthmouth College in New Hampshire.  Guess what?  "Exposure to sexual content in popular movies predicts sexual behavior in adolescence."  Really?

The study sounds interesting.  O'Hara and his colleagues coded 684 top-grossing movies (1998-2004) for seconds of sexual content. 

"The researchers then recruited 1,228 participants, from 12 to 14 years old. Each participant reported which movies they had seen, from collections of fifty randomly selected movies.

Six years later, the participants were surveyed to find out how old they were when they became sexually active, how many partners they had, and how risky their sexual behavior might have been. According to O’Hara, those who had been exposed to high levels of sexual content on film had more sexual partners, indulged in riskier sexual behaviour, and became sexually active earlier."

While the study did not prove causality, I'm convinced of the connection.  The researchers mentioned that the movies appeared to change "sensation seeking" and "also speculate[d] that adolescents learn specific behaviors from the sexual messages in movies."  Read the whole article here.

Regarding media content (especially movies and books), Len and I have always been among the strictest parents we know.*  It hasn't always been easy. 

Sometimes it's hard to decide how "bad" a film needs to be for us to say no to it, and sometimes it's hard to stick to our guns against a child's opposition.  And when they say everyone else is allowed to read or watch [insert title here], I believe them.  I know we're on the edge of the bell curve.  Maybe my kids have had to miss some fun, and maybe we censored some media that didn't deserve it, but overall I'm glad we did.

As researcher Ross O'Hara stated, "This study, and its confluence with other work, strongly suggests that parents need to restrict their children from seeing sexual content in movies at young ages."

Amen!

* It's been a blessing that Len and I are on pretty much the same page regarding appropriate media.  Supporting each other and presenting a united front has been invaluable.

Family Flick: Ponyo

Gotta love that Netflix instant feature!  We recently spent quality family time watching Ponyo, a Japanese fantasy film by the renowned Hayao Miyazaki (you may have heard of Spirited Away).  Ponyo is a goldfish princess who befriends a boy and decides she wants to become human.

The movie is rated G, but our 18 year old college boy (and his friend) sat through the whole show with us--such a rarity, and not just because he's usually away at school!  Miyazaki's animation is charming and intelligent.  Although I consider the ending a bit weak, the overall story is engaging, especially for a G-rated movie.  Also, the voice talents did a great job; this English language version was not filled with woodenly dubbed dialogue.

Here's the official trailer:

On a Lighter Note

Literally!




Find his Christian music inspirations here.

My Dog Skip

For us, the best way to get a variety of ages to view a family show is to declare a "movie dinner." Screen time plus food equals success, so last night we ate grilled chicken and watched My Dog Skip (PG, 2000).

The premise (Netflix summary): "Lonely, 9-year-old Willie Morris lives in the flea-bitten town of Yazoo, Miss. He stinks at sports and has no playmates. So, over the strenuous objections of his hardnosed father, Willie's mother buys him a dog that he promptly dubs "Skip." Before you know it, Skip transforms Willie's life: He makes friends, plays sports and develops an unbreakable bond with the spunky terrier. Based on a true story."

-

The movie looks back on a 1940's boyhood, so culturally it's clean-cut. We (ages 4-14, plus parents) enjoyed the experience. Elements: some typical kid/coming of age moments (silly, mean, heartwarming) as well as some scariness*; sentimental without being sappy. I explained a few references to WWII and segregation.

-

I recommend this as a family movie. Don't just park the kids in front of it--you'll like it, too!

-

*Becca was teary during some of these parts. If all your children are young, you may want to wait, but if your young ones have older siblings, they'll probably be fine.

Dan in Real Life

This is the movie we watched on this week's date night.

The premise: Dan is a widower, father of three girls, and parenting advice columnist. He meets a woman who fascinates him, only to discover that she is his brother's new girlfriend. Much of the movie is devoted to the frustrations of not being able to have (or even TRY to have) someone he wants.

While largely predictable, the movie was still enjoyable. Miscommunications and misunderstandings (in real life or the movies) really bug me, so this plot is one type that draws me in. The interactions with his children (two are teens) felt true to life, and the extended family was a treat.

Dan in Real Life is rated PG-13 (2007), but is on the milder side of that range. There is no explicit sensuality, and very little inappropriate talk, either. There are a few themes that I would want to discuss with watching teens, but I doubt most would be interested anyway (the focus is on a middle-aged dad, after all).

My rating: 3 1/2 stars out of 5. I hardly ever give fives, so this is a perfectly fine ranking. It's not exactly a "dating" movie, but a charming choice for a married date night.

About a Boy

From 2002, here is the Netflix teaser:

Will Lightman (Hugh Grant) is a rich, hip, irresponsible Londoner who, in search of available women, invents an imaginary son and starts attending single-parent meetings -- confident in both parties' inability to make a commitment. But when Will meets Marcus, the troubled 12-year-old son of Fiona (Toni Collette), a quirky and unexpected friendship develops as both Will and Marcus help each other grow up.

It's rated PG-13 for strong language and "some thematic elements". Will's pursuit of women is talked about, sometimes crudely, but there are no graphic visuals.

Lauren and I watched this the other night, and I enjoyed it more than I expected to. Will starts out unapologetically shallow and amusingly blunt, and nothing improves for any of the characters overnight. There is drama as well as comedy.

I wouldn't necessarily call it a chick-flick, but I'm also not sure if Len would have enjoyed it. Rather than find out, I found it easier to let him get some work done and use the movie time to hang out with my girl.

My rating: 4 out of 5 stars

Girly Movies

I took the opportunity while Len was away this weekend to watch some chick-flicks.

First up was A Room With a View (1986), based on the novel by E. M. Forster. Quite slow and very British, it was satisfyingly romantic.

Next, I watched Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day (2008). What a disappointment! It's set in England just before WWII, and stars Amy Adams (of Enchanted). Parts of the plot were fun and sweet, but the high society behavior (lying, cheating, womanizing, partying) which took up almost every minute of screen time was neither. Thumbs down!

A Man Walks Down the Street in That Hat, People Know He's Not Afraid of Anything

--Immortal words spoken to macho Jayne Cobb as he models the hideous hat his ma has made for him. Jayne's a character on a tv show (Firefly) that filmed just 14 episodes 6 years ago, but when David asked me to knit the hat, I was able to find multiple patterns online. Never underestimate the fans!

The problem with multiple patterns was actually the variety, especially when it came to figuring out how many stitches to start with. I made four gauge swatches, then an educated guess, hoping to produce a hat that actually fit. Once past that stumbling block, the actual knitting was pretty easy. A side benefit of the long Thanksgiving drive home was that I was able to finish everything, including my first ever pom-pom. What do you think?It definitely takes a special guy to wear such a--ahem--unique hat.

Mini review: we experienced Firefly on dvd. It's a sort of Western, set in a sci fi future, but driven more by story than technology. Len and I enjoyed that it is intelligent, complex, and funny, with interesting characters, but I can't give an unconditional thumbs up. There is violence, sometimes extreme or gratuitous, and some episodes had too much, shall we say, sensuality. We censored ourselves a bit, and David more. It's maybe surprising we watched it all, considering we haven't allowed ourselves to see the latest James Bond movie.