Hollywoods Attack on Religion

Hollywoods Attack on Religion - Hollywoods Attack on...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Hollywood¹s Attack on Religion H The section that I have chosen to analyze from the book Hollywood vs. America is ³The Attack on Religion.² In this part of the book, Michael Medved discusses the shift in attitude Hollywood has made toward religion, from acceptable to contemptible. He takes a look at the messages being sent in films, music and television in the last 15 to 20 years and analyzes their effects. In general, Hollywood depicts religion in an unfavorable manner, according to Medved. Moreover, Medved also argues that, not only has Hollywood taken a hostile stance toward religion, but it has paid the price, literally, for doing so. All of Medved¹s arguments are well supported and documented, making them seemingly futile to argue against. Yet, Hollywood, which includes films, music and television, continues to disregard the obvious facts that Medved has revealed. In the first chapter of this section, ³A Declaration of War,² Medved discusses the facts surrounding the protest which took place on August 11, 1988, in opposition to the release of the motion picture The Last Temptation of Christ. MCA/Universal, which funded the Martin Scorsese film, called the protesters a ³know-nothing wacky pack² (38). However, as Medved points out, the protest was ³the largest protest ever mounted against the release of a motion picture² (37) and included such groups as the National Council of Catholic Bishops, the Southern Baptist Convention, twenty members of the U.S. House of Representatives and prominent figures such as Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Ken Wales, former vice president at Disney studios. Even with such strong opposition from these respected groups and people, the studio refused to listen and stood behind its First Amendment rights. MCA/Universal was even supported by the Motion Picture Association of America, which stated that ³The . . . MPAA support MCA/Universal in its absolute right to offer to the people whatever movie it chooses² (41). However, Medved rebukes this statement, arguing that ³absolute right² wasn¹t the issue; the issue ³concerned the movie company¹s choices, not its rights² (41). He supports this argument further by indicating that the MPAA would never support a film portraying Malcolm X as a paid agent of Hoover¹s FBI or portraying Anne Frank ³as an out-of- control nymphomaniac² (41). By releasing The Last Temptation of Christ, the studio positions Jesus, God and Christianity below these prominent figures in history because it is portraying Jesus and other religious figures in uncharacteristic
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/24/2011 for the course PHIL 1100 taught by Professor Pelham during the Spring '11 term at York University.

Page1 / 3

Hollywoods Attack on Religion - Hollywoods Attack on...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online