 RED does not mean "stop." GREEN does not mean "go." Click on the CAPCon Alert image for explanation |
A ministry of the ChildCare Action Project: Christian Analysis of American Culture (CAP Ministry) A 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Christian Ministry. www.capalert.com/ Entertainment Media Analysis Report A service to His little ones through you in His name by His Word MAR26051  (2006), PG-13 [R-13*] (1hr 44min) The #1 Christian entertainment media analysis service on the Internet. We give you OBJECTIVE tools NO ONE ELSE CAN to help YOU make an informed decision for yourself whether a film is fit for your family. Over 1000 analyses for parents, grandparents, pastors, youth leaders and more. |
"http://www.capalert.com/ now_playing.htm" Target="_Blank"  Click it to try it! |
  (a PayPal account is NOT required) OR (preferred) by Check or Money Order. The CAP is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit Christian ministry (75-2607488). Donations to us are TAX-DEDUCTIBLE |
on what Hollywood feeds your kids. SUBSCRIBE (or unsubscribe) to our FREE text-only email version of these reports and our COMING SOON notices. |
  Christian Long Distance |
(While the Scriptural references are certainly not subjective, my commentary may be and sometimes is somewhat subjective.)
 Cast/Crew Details Courtesy Internet Movie Database Production (US): 20th Century Fox, Fox 2000 Pictures, Peninsula Films Distribution (US): Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation Director(s): David Frankel Producer(s): Joseph M. Caracciolo Jr., Wendy Finerman, Carla Hacken, Karen Rosenfelt Screenplay: Aline Brosh McKenna Novel: Lauren Weisberger Cinematography/Camera: Florian Ballhaus Music: Theodore Shapiro Film Editing: Mark Livolsi Casting: Ellen Lewis Production Design: Jess Gonchor Art Direction: Anne Seibel, Tom Warren Viewed At: Driftwood Theater 6 I don't know how the MPAA did it, but as I was watching the 104-minute PG-13 The Devil Wears Prada I kept wondering when the "13" would happen. After nearly 1100 film analyses, this film had even me fooled which made me particularly appreciative of the objectivity of the CAP Analysis Model. The number crunching revealed this seemingly "PG" PG-13 to be a rather serious R-13. R-rated films in the comparative baseline database earned final scores of 54 and below. The Devil Wears Prada earned 49. The princess of Princess Diaries (G) and Princess Diaries 2 (G), Anne Hathaway, is not so "G" anymore. Maybe, like Olivia Newton John, Hathaway wants to change her image. She has. Whether she wants to or not. Seeming ne'er-do-well journalist Andrea "Andy" Sachs (Anne Hathaway) wants to make it big in Chicago. But she just can't seem to land that opportunity. After applying at Elias-Parke Publications Andy is sent to Runway Magazine to be interviewed for the position of assistant to Miranda Priestly (Meryl Streep), the most sought and powerful fashion editor in the city. "A million girls would kill for the job." Andy is met by Emily (Emily Blunt), first assistant to Priestly, who warns Andy that she will more than likely fail the interview since Andy is not fashion-conscious. And since Andy, being a size 6, is fat. Oh, by the way, Andy had never heard of Miranda Priestly. According to Emily, that was reason enough to oust Andy from the beginning. After a grueling extended period of intense rudeness by both Emily and Miranda, Andy is successful at landing the position. But does she really want to have this job? It is brutal and vicious and everyone is intensely rude. Even the Design Artist, Nigel (Stanley Tucci) treats Andy as a waste of time (initially). Andy is living with Nate (Adrian Grenier), who either does not own a razor or does not know how to use one. Nate, an aspiring cook, is all in favor of Andy taking the new job ... at first. Living with? Yes, there are several mentions of and displays of this unmarried couple living together. This is the second analysis of a non-R movie in a row (the previous one being Superman Returns) which portrays cohabitation as morally acceptable. Well, cohabitation may be acceptable in the eyes of modern man, but it is not in God's eyes. [Deut. 22:29, 1Cor. 7:1 -2, 1Cor. 7:9, Col. 3:5] Slowly, Andy becomes just like Miranda. Since this report is being prepared on opening day, I will not spoil it for you should you decide this sort of entertainment is fit for you and/or your family. What I will do is itemize the findings in the Findings/Scoring section and discuss them below. Please consider them closely before you make your decision as to the fitness of this film for your young ones of 13 or younger. Or older. The greatest loss of points was due to sexually immoral matters. The Devil Wears Prada is another example of Hollywood's use of many examples of lesser assault on morality and decency to get the same "effect" as using fewer but more bold and extreme examples such as in R-rated films. It is a perfect example of our CAP Rule of 1000. There is no full nudity but several scenes of adult women getting dressed into underwear in what might as well be scenes of nudity as they jostle their parts into the garments. There is no intercourse seen but several undeniable indications of it. The "morning after" scenes remove all doubt. In addition there are numerous presentations of cohabitation such as the woman kissing the man who is still in bed as she leaves the apartment the unmarried couple share. The Sexual Immorality (S) investigation area score for this film is zero. And, according to our Director - Child Psychology Support, a practicing psychologist, licensed school counselor and executive director of a behavior modification service, many examples of "lesser" assault on morality and decency used in less severely rated films can be more morally indelible than the fewer but more extreme examples used in more severely rated films. But the "lesser" examples, though they be many and frequent, individually do not meet or exceed the standards of the MPAA as necessitating the R rating. So, there you have it. An elegant technique, which so few but yet increasing numbers of parents realize, for getting more sexual filth in films for teens to lure the teen dollars. And since more than half of all moviegoers are non-adult, it works. Lucratively. Never mind the corruptive influence on they who are, by biological law and lack of experiential maturity, inherently least capable of responsible management of these heretofore alien fires of basal sexuality. The next area in line for scoring loss in this teen film is the Impudence/Hate content with a ton of uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary. Ever wonder why so many teens use profanity so freely and impudently? Now you know. Sure, your teens hear it every day at school, but from where do you think those kids get the example? Yes, it sometimes comes from mom/dad and other familial sources, but to hear mom/dad speak that way is quite a different matter than when used in and as entertainment. [Col. 3:8] The Drugs/Alcohol content is responsible for the next area in line for scoring loss. The alcohol content of this film can be considered 34 proof since there are 18 uses among the 108 examples of ignominy in this 104-minute film. While it is not a sin to drink, it is to get drunk AND to influence youth to drink. [Matt. 25:40, Luke 17:2] Both the American College of Physicians and the University of Connecticut agree that presentation of alcohol in and as entertainment leads our middle school age youth to abuse alcohol. See the links in the Scriptural reference. [Eph. 5:18] Yes, Jesus drank wine and even created wine from water. But He never got drunk or did He tell or suggest anyone to get drunk. The next scoring reason for the R-13 status is the use of God's name in vain but all without the four letter expletive. With or without the four letter expletive, it is an offense to God (by His Word, not mine) for us to speak His name in anything other than reverence, respect or responsible discussion. This film uses the teen-popular three syllable sentence with God's name trailing it profusely. [Deut. 5:11] Also, divorce entered the story. [Mal. 2:16] Stop stealing the childhood form children, Hollywood and MPAA! SCRIPTURAL APPLICATION(S) If needed to focus or fortify, applicable text is underlined or bracketed [ ] or bold. If you wish to have full context available, the Blue Letter Bible is a convenient source. If you use the Blue Letter Bible, a new window will open. Close it to return here or use "Window" in your browser's menu bar to alternate between the CAP page and the Blue Letter Bible page. CHAPTER/VERSE ***Selected Scriptures of Armour against the influence of the entertainment industry*** As always, it is best to refer to the Findings/Scoring section -- the heart of the CAP analysis model -- for the most complete assessment possible of this movie. |
 |
 Wanton Violence/Crime (W) Impudence/Hate (I) Sexual Immorality (S) Drugs/Alcohol (D): Offense to God (O) Murder/Suicide (M) |
 |
 Christian Educators Association International |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
| There are some in the entertainment industry who maintain that 1) violent programming is harmless because no studies exist that prove a connection between violent entertainment and aggressive behavior in children, and 2) young people know that television, movies, and video games are simply fantasy. Unfortunately, they are wrong on both accounts." And "Viewing violence may lead to real life violence." I applaud these associations for fortifying 1 Cor. 15:33. Read the rest of the story. From our more than eight years of study, I contend that other aberrant behaviors, attitudes, and expressions can be inserted in place of "violence" in that statement. Our Director - Child Psychology Support, a licensed psychologist and certified school psychologist concurs. For example, "Viewing arrogance against fair authority may lead to your kids defying you in real life." Or "Viewing sex may lead to sex in real life." Likewise and especially with impudence, hate and foul language. I further contend that any positive behavior can be inserted in place of "violence" with the same chance or likelihood of being a behavior template for the observer; of being incorporated into the behavior mechanics and/or coping skills of the observer. In choosing your entertainment, please consider carefully the "rest of the story" and our findings. |
| In the name of Jesus: Thank you for visiting us and may God bless you. Prayerfully, we will provide you with some of the most revealing commentary and investigative reporting you have ever read. Lord, Master, Teacher, Savior, God. Tom Carder President ChildCare Action Project (CAP): Christian Analysis of American Culture 100% dependent on your tax-deductible financial support |  |
|
|
|
||
Christian Long Distance |
We exist only by your tax-deductible donations. PLEASE Features PayPal! You do NOT need an account to donate. |
