 Click on CAPCon Alert image for explanation |
A service to our youth through you, their parents and grandparents, in His name by His Word MAR22125 The Hot Chick (2002), PG-13 Analysis Date: December 6, 2002 CAP Score: 41 CAP Influence Density: 2.18 MinMax: -100 |
 |
 NO service charges. All donations are tax deductible. | To subscribe to (or unsubscribe from) our FREE text-only versions of our Entertainment Media Analysis Reports as they are calculated, visit our Mailman. If you experience difficulty with Mailman, send us your request. Your email address will NOT be given or sold to other parties. |
 |
THE HOT CHICK (PG-13) -- Jessica now has some new things to think about. Production: Happy Madison, Walt Disney Pictures Distribution: Buena Vista Pictures, Touchstone Pictures Director(s): Tom Brady Producer(s): Carr D'Angelo, Jack Giarraputo, Robin Mulcahy Fisichella, Nathan Talbert Reimann, Guy Riedel, Adam Sandler, John Schneider Written by/Screenplay: Tom Brady (story and screenplay), Rob Schneider Cinematography/Camera: Tim Suhrstedt Music: Michael Andrews, John Debney Film Editing: Peck Prior Casting: Gail Goldberg, Donna Morong, Marcia Ross Production Design: Marc Fisichella Art Direction: Tom Frohling  If you are looking for a traditional "review" of The Hot Chick, stop here and move on. We do not do "reviews." We conduct analyses of films to tell mom/dad the truth about the content of them so they can make an informed decision whether a film is fit for their kids (which includes at-home teens) or not. And we use the teachings and expectations of Jesus as our yardstick. The Hot Chick is R-13. Mostly because of foul language and sex. Apparently these are the entertainment features filmmakers think our early teens and preteens want and that the MPAA thinks are acceptable for your 13 year olds and younger. Maybe 13 year olds and younger do want these ignominy in their entertainment, but does that excuse giving them sin and serving it up in a platter with warm-hearted comedy gravy? God admonishes us about this by asking, if your son would ask for bread would you give him a stone? [Matt. 7:9] Should we give our kids sinematic cyanide if they ask for entertainment? God further admonishes us, indeed warns us about covering sin with sin. [Is. 30:1] While Is. 30:1 speaks to rebellious children, are we all that different if we as adults rebel against His Counsel by encouraging such sin in sinema by excusing it in the name of entertainment? By covering sin with a cover of modern morality? Is it not we who are feeding our children counsel not of the Lord? This movie should stick to their ribs a very long time. And to their hearts. And their coping skills and decision-making skills. More sermon later. Rob Schneider is Jessica Spencer (Rachel McAdams) - er - Clive Maxtone (Rob Schneider) - er both in this homosexually-charged comedy about forced personality exchange, male with female. A special set of earrings were used thousands of years ago by a princess to escape a marriage she did not want by placing herself in a slave girl's body. Now let us jump to the present. Poor little Jessica made a high school witch mad with her little insulting quips. The witch was the only one who made a grade of A on a paper about the Salem witch trials. The witch put a curse on Jessica. Through shoplifting, Jessica came into possession of the cursed earrings that can switch "souls" of two people, each wearing one of the earrings. Jessica had one. Clive got the other. Then Jessica became Clive and Clive became Jessica in every way except body. Now, Jessica is in Clive's body and Clive is in Jessica's body. And to top it off, all this happened a few days before cheerleading tryouts and the prom. Clive is a small-time thief and crook who makes his "living" robbing convenience stores. He lives in what once was a place where humans lived. It now appears to be roach residence. Jessica is little miss perfect. Socially anyway. At least in social warfare. Spoiled brat would be a better description. Coming from a middle class American home, Jessica seems to think she is the standard for all other teenage girls. But Jessica now has some new things to think about. And so does Clive. So, now this 30-something man is in a high school girl's body. The high school girl is in a 30-something man's body. And the sexual vulgarities masked in humor abound. About 58 examples per hour. Some of them sound as if they belong in a porn flick. Well? Maybe this is a toned-down-for-teens porn flick. All for your high school aged children. This movie should do well in showing our 13 year olds and younger what the screenwriters think high school life is like. Or at least what they want you to think it is like. Ever wonder why the only change in high school life from year to year is worse? This led that and that led this in a slurry of high school hyjinks. Jessica, while in Maxtone's body, is asked several times by her girl classmates "Can I see it?" Much of the screen time presented Schneider in girl's underwear, doing many of the private things a girl supposedly does. And, of course, an erection was not ignored. Exhibitionism was rampant. There was so much sexual talk, comments, innuendo and insults that a porn producer might have been offended. And all if it by teens. At least by actors and actresses portraying teens. The optics were there. As do many films, in addition to many negative behavioral templates The Hot Chick provides several positive "messages" and behavioral templates: love, friendship, self-sacrifice, courage, trust, loyalty. But none of them excuses the saturation with sexual immorality. Nothing excuses sin. Not portrayal real life. Nothing. Even Jesus does not excuse sin. He forgives our sin but does not excuse it. Recall the prostitute who's life Jesus saved from the laws of the day. He did not excuse her sin. He forgave her of her sin, but He did not excuse the sin. Prostitution was (and is) as sinful after He forgave her of it as it was before He forgave her. He even reminded her of the sin of prostitution by telling her "Go. Sin no more." "Redemption" in films does NOT excuse the sinful demonstrations in them. Note also that, for example, love built on sin is NOT a positive behavioral template. Indeed the movie got to the point where the plot seemed a product of the sexual vulgarities, a mere vehicle for exploring how many ways the human mind can conceive of and demonstrate expressions of sexual immorality. That there was any intelligent thought that went into the plot seemed more coincidental or a stroke of luck than design. For whatever reason, the filmmakers had Jessica's little brother, about 8 or 9 years old, having a fetish for girl things, masking it with him being an appropriately annoying privacy pest to his sister as little brothers are "supposed to be." But why they had him dressing up with make-up and jewelry and dancing to and singing a girl's song was out of place in the plot and revealed a likely more probably purpose, maybe a younger version of Michael in Billy Elliot. The presence of homosexuality was bold and broad in this film. With a final score of 41 The Hot Chick is "R-13." Hardcore R-13. Fully 100 individual examples of sexual innuendo and/or sexually immoral, offensive or vulgar issues, comments and behaviors of some sort or another are presented in this 102 minutes of sugar-coated celluloid ethical cyanide. One such example is an adult actor dropping his underwear before a group of actresses playing high school girls. With full rear male nudity to the camera. And with comments about size. More than once. Of course the comments from the teen girls exiting the audience will be "I liked it" in a manufactured mature and worldly way. It is no wonder why the little girl of about 4 in the audience said to her mother "Mommy, what's that?" The ton of snicker-giggle crowd attendees (middle schoolers) were having a ball -- as their childhood was being stolen from them. In addition to the thickness with sexual immorality, The Hot Chick increased the immoral viscosity of the film [Rev. 21:8, Mark 7:21, Gal. 5:19, Rev. 22:15, 1Cor. 6:9-10] by including 26 uses of foul language, including the most foul of the foul words [Col. 3:8, Prov. 22:11]. Respect for God's name was cheapened by 13 uses of it in vain [Deut. 5:11] but none with the four letter expletive. And since the apparent impression filmmakers have of high schoolers is that all teenagers are not only sex machines but are drug-crazed drunks, drinking and drugs were present in the script, in a positive and responsible light, of course [1Cor. 6:9-10]. Rather than belabor any further here in the Summary/Commentary the issues of onscreen behavior in violation of His Word, let the listing in the Findings/Scoring section tell the whole story. SCRIPTURAL APPLICATION(S) If needed to focus or fortify, applicable text is underlined or bracketed [ ]. 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. ***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)(1): Sex/Homosexuality (S): Drugs/Alcohol (D): Offense to God (O)(2): Murder/Suicide (M)(3): |
 NO service charges!!! Donations to the CAP Ministry are Tax Deductible!!! |
 |
 |
 |
 Christian Media News |
 A Singles Christian Network |
 |
 |
 |
|
| NOTE: The CAP Analysis Model makes no scoring allowances for trumped-up "messages" to excuse or for manufacturing of justification for aberrant behavior or imagery, or for camouflaging such ignominy with "redeeming" programming. Disguising sinful behavior in a theme plot does not excuse the sinful behavior of either the one who is drawing pleasure or example from the sinful display or the practitioners demonstrating the sinful behavior. This is NOT a movie review service. It is a movie analysis service to parents and grandparents to tell them the truth about movies using the Truth. |
| "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 nearly seven 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. |
