What followed was the extortion of a corrupt prosecutor, a lawsuit that crippled the Howard family and their business and even the abduction of their daughter. Needless to say, Mike put his foot down and stood up against the demands of these whackos, but that single act of defiance would prove to be his downfall. Things that any sane person would scoff at were drudged up like the fact that Splash promotes bestiality because Tom Hanks has sex with a mermaid. It wasn't just this one particular film that the group wanted gone from their community and soon many more titles were on their chopping block for some silly reasons. He apparently didn't count on a rabid religious extremist group that was lead ruthlessly by Reverend Matthew Brewer. Since the bulk of the rental and distribution chains refused to carry the controversial film, Mike was unwavering in his resolve and didn't see the harm with renting one particular movie. Everything was going great for him, his business and his family until he made the decision to rent The Last Temptation of Christ at his stores. Louis and became the success story everyone dreams about. You see, Mike was a visionary in his time and back in the very early 80's he took a leap of faith to start a video rental chain in St. Howard seemed to have it all, a beautiful wife, a lovely daughter and a thriving business. Names have been changed in the film though, so our main character is a gentleman named Mike Howard (Matt Lescher). While some of the events seem to have been exaggerated to aide in the translation to film, the heart of the story surrounds the events that rocked the foundations of a man leading the American dream. Heart of the Beholder is written, produced and directed by Ken Tipton and he is the driving force behind this project, mostly because this is the story of his life. Heart of the Beholder is a movie that carries that very message and is based on a true story about religious extremists and the length they'll go to see that no one in their community rents films that they deem to be filth. The bottom line is that as long as the questionable material is only being sold or rented to the appropriate audience that it's rated for, nobody has a right to censor it. It wasn't too long ago that I caught a special on A&E (at least I think that's the channel I was watching) that featured an ongoing lawsuit involving some Hollywood director's and a group of companies editing out all unfavorable parts of the film and selling it as a cleaned edition.īeauty and what is considered objectionable is purely in the eye of the beholder, but that doesn't give anyone the right to censor copyrighted material or force the product from being produced or distributed. Instead of not partaking in the objectionable subject matter there are some extremist groups out there that go to length such as banning the material all together so no one can view it. This is one such issue that strikes a cord with me and every time I see this topic on the news it gets my blood boiling. No matter what the motive behind the artist director of the project, someone somewhere is going to be offended, but at what stage of censorship and decency do you have to draw a line? ![]() It seems that every other week or so there is a report on the news somewhere about some controversy or another revolving around a scene in a movie, part of a videogame or something on a TV show. Censorship is one of those topics that spark heated debates among many circles depending on the target material and reasons for the censoring.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |