 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 MAR2011.119  (2011), PG-13 [Hard R-13*] (2hr 3.3min) 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 1300 analyses for parents, grandparents, pastors, youth leaders and more. |
 |
  (a PayPal account is NOT required). The CAP is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit Christian ministry. Donations are TAX-DEDUCTIBLE. |
on what Hollywood feeds your kids. SUBSCRIBE (or unsubscribe) to our FREE 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, Bad Hat Harry, Marvel Entertainment, Dune Entertainment Distribution (US): Fox Home Entertainment Director(s): Matthew Vaughn Producer(s): Gregory Goodman, Simon Kinberg, Stan Lee, Josh McLaglen, Tarquin Pack, Lauren Shuler Donner, Bryan Singer Screenplay by: Ashley miller, Zack Stenz, Jane Goldman, Matthew Vaughn Story by: Sheldon turner, Bryan Singer Cinematography/Camera: John Mathieson Music: Henry Jackman Film Editing: Eddie Hamilton, Lee Smith Casting: Roger Mussenden, Jeremy Rich, Lucinda Syson Production Design: Chris Seagers Art Direction: Grant Armstrong, Paul Booth, Alex Cameron, Steve Cooper, Tom Frohling, Alan Gilmore, James Hambidge, Marc Homes, Joe Howard, John King, Adam O'Neill, Dawn Swiderski, Su Whitaker Viewed on Fox Home Entertainment DVD  I've gotten 27 minutes into this flick and I can tell already it's going to be another R-13. We'll See. . . . Well, I've finished viewing the film and finished crunching the numbers. And my suspicions were correct. With a final score of 11 out of 100, X-Men: First Class is as "R" as an R-13 can get. And again, not because of a few extreme assaults on morality but because of s-o-o-o many less extreme assaults. Consider: a one hour film with 10 assaults on morality and decency worth, say, 100 "bads" each is as morally assaultive as a one hour film with 50 assaults but each worth only 20 "bads" each. X-Men: First Class is a prime example of the latter. For more information on this technique of loading films to achieve the "feel" of a more severe film, see our CAP Rule of 1000 publication. As a special feature, following is a comparative of the four X-Men films:  This comparative display is an update of the comparative data display shown in X-Men: The Last Stand, a.k.a. X-Men III, or X3 which provides a comparative of the first three X-Men films. I am going to gloat for the CAP Analysis Model. It perfectly predicted the scoring decay and increase of the influence density for X-Men: First Class. Perfectly. I know it is hard to discern with my cheap software but please try to note the five-point stars over the question marks above X4 in each of the two graphs at the bottom. The question marks above the X4 in each graph indicate the predictions for X-Men: First Class (X4) made in 2006 by the trend revealed in our analyses of the first three X-Men films. The five-point star above X4 in each graph indicates the calculated scores from analysis of X-Men: First Class (X4). Each datapoint star fell directly over the question mark, indicating perfect prediction of the values. Note also that except for the score of the first X-Men film (X), the scores and influence density figures fell in the R-domain. I would say this verifies the credibility of this CAP Analysis Model. What should we expect? I may be the engineer of the model but Jesus is the Designer. In this X-case I am not going to spend the time providing a bit of a discussion about the plot and story as I usually do. Essentially, X1 approximately equals X2 approximately equals X3 approximately equals X4. It is the same basic story using most of the same characters doing the same things but this time without the subliminal influence of Sir Ian McKellen and his self-proclaimed chosen lifestyle. Nor am I going to provide the individual Investigation Area discussions I usually provide. This report is devoted to the comparative information, except... I will, however, throw in one notation. So many who oppose what we do have tried to chide me for including statue nudity into the scoring of a film. This film explains our position regarding statue nudity better than I could in words. In one scene is a statue of female nudity. One of the characters fondled the breasts of the nude female statue with lustful expressions. Need I say more? Please inspect the listings in the Findings section and note the thermometers showing the scoring distribution for this film before you decide whether to watch this movie. 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. |
 |
(The objective heart of the CAP Analysis Model, independent of and insulated from the Summary / Commentary section.)  Wanton Violence/Crime (W) - 5 out of 100 Impudence/Hate (I) - 54 out of 100 Sexual Immorality (S) - Zero out of 100 Drugs/Alcohol (D) - 5 out of 100 Offense to God (O) - Zero out of 100 Murder/Suicide (M) - Zero out of 100 |
| 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 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. |
|
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. In the name of Jesus: Lord, Master, Teacher, Savior, God. Tom Carder Chaplain and 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. |
| For G rated Films with G equivalence: G PG equivalence: PG-G PG-13 equivalence: 13-G R equivalence: R-G< | For PG rated Films with G equivalence: G-PG PG equivalence: PG PG-13 equivalence: 13-PG R equivalence: R-PG | For PG-13 rated Films with G equivalence: G-13 PG equivalence: PG(13) PG-13 equivalence: PG-13 R equivalence: R-13 | For R rated Films with G equivalence: G-R PG equivalence: PG-R PG-13 equivalence: 13-R R equivalence: R | For NR rated Films with G equivalence: G-NR PG equivalence: PG-NR PG-13 equivalence: 13-NR R equivalence: R-NR |