Caprica DVD Nudity -- Slight Warning (Spoiler!)
Rob Jensen
than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite a
bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal) in
what's known as the V Bar, several scenes, including the opening. It's
a great (as in, like, totally awesome) shock to the system that says,
"This ain't even like the new version of Battlestar Galactica." Unlike
the Razor DVD, which was clearly labelled on the front as Unrated,
Caprica don't come with a warning like that, or even any sort of a
content warning on the back underneath the Not Rated rating, so anyone
with young teens or tweens expecting broadcast/basic cabel-level
content will probably want to be warned in advance 'cause the movie is
definitely the equivalent of an R rating.
Addendum: I'm a First Amendment liberal, so this isn't a call against
the movie or the series. In fact, I thought that the movie was
awesome and I'm very much hoping that the series continues to not pull
punches for at least the eventual DVD versions of the episodes -- to
the point of doing blurs and bleeps to keep the R-rated level in the
broadcast version rather than do bowdlerized alternate takes ala
certain pay cable shows. I'm also hoping that this stuff is not
simply a ploy for a theatrical run in Europe ala the pilot for
Stargate SG-1. But since the content is unexpected and not labelled
on the DVD, I thought it deserved a heads up.
-- Rob
Volfie999
> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite a
> bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal) in
> what's known as the V Bar, several scenes, including the opening. It's
> a great (as in, like, totally awesome) shock to the system that says,
> "This ain't even like the new version of Battlestar Galactica." Unlike
> the Razor DVD, which was clearly labelled on the front as Unrated,
> Caprica don't come with a warning like that, or even any sort of a
> content warning on the back underneath the Not Rated rating, so anyone
> with young teens or tweens expecting broadcast/basic cabel-level
> content will probably want to be warned in advance 'cause the movie is
> definitely the equivalent of an R rating.
>
Was is Polly Walker? I'll rush right out and get if it was her. She
was great in Rome, like that. :)
Rob Jensen
wrote the original post at 5am in the morning my time due to
cough-induced insomnia and forgot to add the groups.
Nope. A lot of nudity in the Thunderdome-in-the-Opera-House-esque V
Club during the first half-hour and especially in the first five
minutes. I would hope that if the R-rated-ness of the pilot continues
for the series (for the DVDs, with pixelation and alternate shots for
the broadcast/cable version) that Polly Walker would be included. The
deleted scenes certainly indicate that her character feels at home in
the V Club.
-- Rob
Obveeus
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite a
> bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal)
Define 'full frontal'. I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
The Caprica pilot was definitely good, though, and I cannot wait for this
series to start.
Dano
> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
>> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
>> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite
>> a bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal)
>
> Define 'full frontal'. I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
>
I want a definition of decadence while we're at it. Is it full frontal male
or female BTW?
> The Caprica pilot was definitely good, though, and I cannot wait for
> this series to start.
Is the pilot only on DVD or are they cleaning it up for broadcast?
Obveeus
"Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e91Il.94150$e_5....@newsfe03.iad...
> Obveeus wrote:
>> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
>>> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
>>> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite
>>> a bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal)
>>
>> Define 'full frontal'. I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
>>
>
> I want a definition of decadence while we're at it. Is it full frontal
> male or female BTW?
I didn't notice any 'full frontal' nudity. Maybe Rob was pausing and
staring at every background shot or something, but all I noticed was some
topless women. It was enough nudity to cause some needed editing before it
airs on Syfy, but it wasn't enough nudity to require a 'warning' as this
thread suggests. If there was a need for a warning, it would be to the
context of the nudity and what it says about our own children's near future.
>> The Caprica pilot was definitely good, though, and I cannot wait for
>> this series to start.
>
> Is the pilot only on DVD or are they cleaning it up for broadcast?
It will be broadcast on Syfy eventually, but yes, they will need to clean it
up some.
Eric Stoltz is a great casting choice.
If you get a hold of the DVD, make sure to watch the deleted scenes.
shawn
>
>"Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:e91Il.94150$e_5....@newsfe03.iad...
>> Obveeus wrote:
>>> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
>>>> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
>>>> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite
>>>> a bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal)
>>>
>>> Define 'full frontal'. I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
>>>
>>
>> I want a definition of decadence while we're at it. Is it full frontal
>> male or female BTW?
>
>I didn't notice any 'full frontal' nudity. Maybe Rob was pausing and
>staring at every background shot or something, but all I noticed was some
>topless women. It was enough nudity to cause some needed editing before it
>airs on Syfy, but it wasn't enough nudity to require a 'warning' as this
>thread suggests. If there was a need for a warning, it would be to the
>context of the nudity and what it says about our own children's near future.
So it's a lot like the typical Showtime fare like "Jeremiah"? I
remember that show having the occasional female nudity included that
was easily clipped out without damaging the story telling for the
SciFi channel.
David
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:18:44 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obve...@aol.com> wrote:
> >I didn't notice any 'full frontal' nudity. Maybe Rob was pausing and
> >staring at every background shot or something, but all I noticed was some
> >topless women. It was enough nudity to cause some needed editing before it
> >airs on Syfy, but it wasn't enough nudity to require a 'warning' as this
> >thread suggests. If there was a need for a warning, it would be to the
> >context of the nudity and what it says about our own children's near future.
>
> So it's a lot like the typical Showtime fare like "Jeremiah"? I
> remember that show having the occasional female nudity included that
> was easily clipped out without damaging the story telling for the
> SciFi channel.
The nudity may be meant for international sales. Some U.S. pilots
leaked online have also had it ("Smith," for example).
Obveeus
"shawn" <nanof...@gmail.com> wrote:
> So it's a lot like the typical Showtime fare like "Jeremiah"? I
> remember that show having the occasional female nudity included that
> was easily clipped out without damaging the story telling for the
> SciFi channel.
None of the nudity is in any way integral to the story, so it will be easy
to clip out (or pixilate) without any loss of meaning to the overall show.
ib...@san.rr.com
> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
> than anything else.
Get back to me when it's Magda.
Rob Jensen
wrote:
>Obveeus wrote:
>> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> I'm not going to include spoiler space because this is a warning more
>>> than anything else. Watched the Caprica pilot DVD about 5 hours ago
>>> and yes, they labelled it "Not Rated" on the back, but there's quite
>>> a bit of decadence and frontal nudity (a couple of them full-frontal)
>>
>> Define 'full frontal'. I'm not sure it means what you think it means.
>>
>
>I want a definition of decadence while we're at it. Is it full frontal male
>or female BTW?
Thankfully, femaile.
>> The Caprica pilot was definitely good, though, and I cannot wait for
>> this series to start.
>
>Is the pilot only on DVD or are they cleaning it up for broadcast?
So far, only DVD, but c'mon, it's the pilot for the series, it'll
eventually be broadcast on Skiffy -- and will *obviously* have to be
cleaned up for broadcast.
-- Rob
Obveeus
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 13:01:31 -0400, "Dano" <janea...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>>I want a definition of decadence while we're at it. Is it full frontal
>>male
>>or female BTW?
>
> Thankfully, femaile.
There were no naked postal workers that I could see.
Arthur Lipscomb
<ib...@san.rr.com> wrote in message
news:be4b5794-5916-460a...@w31g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Anyone want to discuss the actual movie? Or do I have to wait for a 5 star
poll?
Obveeus
"Arthur Lipscomb" <art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote in message
news:gsr6qj$vs2$1...@news.motzarella.org...
The movie (TV pilot) was excellent. The two male family leads are perfectly
cast.
The suckiest part of the whole thing is that I will now have to wait almost
a year for the next episode.
Rob Jensen
I posted my initial reaction to Caprica on David Johnston's What Did
You Watch thread for Tuesday night, 4-21. OTOH, George hasn't done a
5-star poll for it, so I think that you should start one. Don't call
it a five-star poll, though, 'cause that's his turf, just call it
"Poll: Caprica DVD" and we'll rate it according to 5-stars anyway.
-- Rob
Dawnie
>Arthur Lipscomb wrote
>> Anyone want to discuss the actual movie? Or do I have to wait for a 5
>> star poll?
>
>The movie (TV pilot) was excellent. The two male family leads are perfectly cast.
>The suckiest part of the whole thing is that I will now have to wait almost
>a year for the next episode.
What he said. I already like Eric Stoltz and Esai Morales, so I'm even
more thrilled. It felt like watching the first episode of BSG or
HEROES and thinking wow, there's gonna be great things in store. But
the flip side is I can already tell that the same thing I hated about
the reimagined BSG is going to be the same thing I'll hate about
CAPRICA--their religious mumbo jumbo. Otherwise, I love them shiny
metal cybernetic life nodes!
Wish it was going to start this fall instead of next year. Darn it.
Hunter
8e8406...@f19g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>, mooseb...@hotmail.com
says...
Unfortunately no. She is both a religious counselor at a religious
school and the secret head or representative of a monotheistic
religious cult , so she dresses only slightly sexier than a 1960's
fifth grade teacher. She still looks great though. I like my women
usually with some meat on their bones (Grace Park is one of the
exceptions LOL!) Loved her in "Rome" To bad it was too freaking
expensive to keep going.
--
----->Hunter
"No man in the wrong can stand up against
a fellow that's in the right and keeps on acomin'."
-----William J. McDonald
Captain, Texas Rangers from 1891 to 1907
Arthur Lipscomb
"Dawnie" <siok...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:iii3v4lmm8rsn7p08...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 23 Apr 2009 23:25:17 -0400, "Obveeus" <Obv...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>>Arthur Lipscomb wrote
>>> Anyone want to discuss the actual movie? Or do I have to wait for a 5
>>> star poll?
>>
>>The movie (TV pilot) was excellent. The two male family leads are
>>perfectly cast.
>>The suckiest part of the whole thing is that I will now have to wait
>>almost
>>a year for the next episode.
>
> What he said. I already like Eric Stoltz and Esai Morales, so I'm even
> more thrilled. It felt like watching the first episode of BSG or
> HEROES and thinking wow, there's gonna be great things in store. But
> the flip side is I can already tell that the same thing I hated about
> the reimagined BSG is going to be the same thing I'll hate about
> CAPRICA--their religious mumbo jumbo.
But now that we know there really is some entitty out there pulling the
strings, the serires will be an opportunity to explore what it is and what
it wants.
Otherwise, I love them shiny
> metal cybernetic life nodes!
>
Yep. And judging from the comments on the commentary track we're going to
get to see just how they were used to conquere/unfiy the colonies.
> Wish it was going to start this fall instead of next year. Darn it.
At least there's another movie to help make the wait somewhat bearable.
Dawnie
<art...@alum.calberkeley.org> wrote:
>Dawnie wrote
>> the flip side is I can already tell that the same thing I hated about
>> the reimagined BSG is going to be the same thing I'll hate about
>> CAPRICA--their religious mumbo jumbo.
>
>But now that we know there really is some entitty out there pulling the
>strings, the serires will be an opportunity to explore what it is and what
>it wants.
Apart from how it contributes to better and more interesting
storylines, I really don't care. I'd like it as an aspect of the show,
but not the entire focus. I was intrigued by BSG's mythical elements
until the writers started producing Gaius episodes. Boy I hated those.
>Otherwise, I love them shiny
>> metal cybernetic life nodes!
>
>Yep. And judging from the comments on the commentary track we're going to
>get to see just how they were used to conquere/unfiy the colonies.
Excellent!
>> Wish it was going to start this fall instead of next year. Darn it.
>
>At least there's another movie to help make the wait somewhat bearable.
There is? It better be good <g>.
Pete B
Shut...@aol.com says...
You are sure it wasn't just done to pad the 30 minutte script to 90
mins? ;)
Pelerin Galimatias
xxxh@_xsomeething.com says...
I found the idea of the first cylon to be interesting. It explains several
of the factors of the series. I had wondered how a machine could develop
self-awareness and dislike of mankind like Skynet. Now I know.
(Opening nudity and abandon were necessary.)
--
0000001000000100000110001000011010001111110010111011101000010000
Rob Jensen
wrote:
I'm sure. All of the V Club stuff was necessary not just because the
scenes had to be there 1) to explain the nature of Zoe 2.0, 2) to
explain the nature of the V Club and depict how extreme the decadence
and brutality is there and 3) to depict Zoe 2.0's distaste for what
the V Club says to her about humanity.
-- Rob
Dawnie
wrote:
>I'm sure. All of the V Club stuff was necessary not just because the
>scenes had to be there 1) to explain the nature of Zoe 2.0, 2) to
>explain the nature of the V Club and depict how extreme the decadence
>and brutality is there and 3) to depict Zoe 2.0's distaste for what
>the V Club says to her about humanity.
IAWTP. I really didn't think much of it until I read your above
explanation. Well done.
Arthur Lipscomb
I was thinking of how Zoe 2.0 said she did not want to be brought out of her
virtual world and brought into the real world. And how she was forced out
anyway and placed into an artificial metallic body (as well as Tamara's
distraught with the virtual body she was placed in). I was
comparing/contrasting that with Cavil's rant about being forced out of his
metallic body and placed into a limited human form body. Each instance had
(or will have) unintended consequences for the ones who forced that change.
Although in Cavil's instance it's not 100% clear that change was really
forced on him.
Pelerin Galimatias
art...@alum.calberkeley.org says...
cylons were created by the 5 holding their hands in a tank of goop. I can't
believe that I just wrote this stupid stuff. I wasted a lot of time on BSG.
--
0000001000000100000110001000011010001111110010111011101000010000
David Barnett
news:ewhJl.3098$b11....@nwrddc02.gnilink.net...
I had trouble understanding what the young girls were saying at the
beginning of the show.
Unfortunately I did not have the benefit of CC.
I think they should take lessons on how to enunciate.
However, later the diction of the 2 main lead young girls had improved
AFAIWC.
I had no trouble with the diction of the adults.
Consequently I thought the second half of the show was much better, and I
will be looking forward to the next episode, which was not what I was
originally thinking.
After the final episode of nu-BSG I had the same thought as you "I wasted a
lot of time on BSG".
I hope history is not going to repeat itself with Caprica, tho I fear it
might.
As for the nudity, I did not think it was at all erotic; it might have been
if there were bigger & longer close ups.
--
David Barnett
Rob Jensen
Well, in posting the warning, I wasn't considering whether or not the
nudity was erotic -- I just think a heads-up was warranted given that
there's no hint of it in the description on the back of the box and
BSG, being a basic cable show with broadcast-TV-level content, that
families with kids were entitled to get a warning. Sure, the DVD was
Unrated, but it totally buried that fact while the Razor DVD blares it
on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers" and I
wouldn't have said anything.
As it is, though, I think the DVD's lack of disclosure on the box
sandbags parents, especially since the episode focuses on younger
characters who aren't nude in the episode but whom parents might get
the idea from the open V-Club scene that they will be later on in the
episode.
-- Rob
Obveeus
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
> Well, in posting the warning, I wasn't considering whether or not the
> nudity was erotic -- I just think a heads-up was warranted given that
> there's no hint of it in the description on the back of the box and
> BSG, being a basic cable show with broadcast-TV-level content, that
> families with kids were entitled to get a warning. Sure, the DVD was
> Unrated, but it totally buried that fact while the Razor DVD blares it
> on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
> underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
> images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers" and I
> wouldn't have said anything.
In what world are there parents letting their kids watch Battlestar
Galactica / Caprica, but not thinking that those kids are ready to handle
seeing a topless girl on a TV screen? Rob...you are really out of touch
with reality.
> As it is, though, I think the DVD's lack of disclosure on the box
> sandbags parents, especially since the episode focuses on younger
> characters who aren't nude in the episode but whom parents might get
> the idea from the open V-Club scene that they will be later on in the
> episode.
In theory, aren't all the patrons of the V-club suposed to be underage kids?
Wasn't that the whole point of the V-club being created?
Ryan P
> In what world are there parents letting their kids watch Battlestar
> Galactica / Caprica, but not thinking that those kids are ready to handle
> seeing a topless girl on a TV screen? Rob...you are really out of touch
> with reality.
Its called a parental double standard. Parents let their kids spend
hours in front of a Playstation playing Grand Theft Auto where they kill
people, pick up hookers, and other horrible things for fun, but then get
upset when a boob is accidentally flashed at the Super Bowl.
Blueshirt
Nipples are evil alien creations that are out to destroy mankind.... and
sometimes they do!!!
Ryan P
> Nipples are evil alien creations that are out to destroy mankind.... and
> sometimes they do!!!
Their presence often causes men's minds to melt... Maybe they're
created by the Hulu people!
kitekrazy
news:gt7pve$1dm$1...@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>> Well, in posting the warning, I wasn't considering whether or not the
>> nudity was erotic -- I just think a heads-up was warranted given that
>> there's no hint of it in the description on the back of the box and
>> BSG, being a basic cable show with broadcast-TV-level content, that
>> families with kids were entitled to get a warning. Sure, the DVD was
>> Unrated, but it totally buried that fact while the Razor DVD blares
>> it on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
>> underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
>> images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers" and I
>> wouldn't have said anything.
>
> In what world are there parents letting their kids watch Battlestar
> Galactica / Caprica, but not thinking that those kids are ready to
> handle seeing a topless girl on a TV screen? Rob...you are really out
> of touch with reality.
>
That and a poorly written pilot like Crapica.
David Barnett
news:Xns9BFCA5BB8...@207.115.33.102...
>> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
>>> Well, in posting the warning, I wasn't considering whether or not the
>>> nudity was erotic -- I just think a heads-up was warranted given that
>>> there's no hint of it in the description on the back of the box and
>>> BSG, being a basic cable show with broadcast-TV-level content, that
>>> families with kids were entitled to get a warning. Sure, the DVD was
>>> Unrated, but it totally buried that fact while the Razor DVD blares
>>> it on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
>>> underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
>>> images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers" and I
>>> wouldn't have said anything.
>> In what world are there parents letting their kids watch Battlestar
>> Galactica / Caprica, but not thinking that those kids are ready to
>> handle seeing a topless girl on a TV screen? Rob...you are really out
>> of touch with reality.
> That and a poorly written pilot like Crapica.
I have re-watched the show, this time with the benefit of closed captions.
The first time I watched I only liked the second half, but now I like it
all.
Consequently I disagree about it being poorly written, tho IMHO poorly
spoken by the younger actresses.
I am looking forward to further episodes, tho a little worried re the
religion aspects.
I found the Adama revelation interesting.
--
David Barnett
Rob Jensen
Obveeus clearly doesn't live in a flyover state -- or at least, a
non-urban area in a flyover state. The double-standard does exist in
the Bible Belt, but OTOH, I'd also be giving a heads up if the
violence and gore were at the level of the skeeviest episodes of the
CSIs or The X-Files or of most slasher flicks as I think even parents
familiar with BSG would be off-put if there was that amount of gore
when BSG itself was mostly (Razor and the Pegasus 2-parter
notwithstanding) mostly the level of a typical action movie.
Or to look at it another way: if a parent really, really loves Doctor
Who, I'd warn them about the *extremely* more adult content of
Torchwood -- highly recommending the show but strongly urging them
that it's inappropriate for kids. Not because Jack and Ianto are a
couple, but because in general it's a lot more violent *and* a lot
more sexually charged than Doctor Who.
-- Rob
Obveeus
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:ngrhv4pdg9h1iald6...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 29 Apr 2009 14:06:20 -0500, Ryan P
> <rdeletet...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>On 4/28/2009 3:46 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>>
>>> In what world are there parents letting their kids watch Battlestar
>>> Galactica / Caprica, but not thinking that those kids are ready to
>>> handle
>>> seeing a topless girl on a TV screen? Rob...you are really out of touch
>>> with reality.
>>
>> Its called a parental double standard. Parents let their kids spend
>>hours in front of a Playstation playing Grand Theft Auto where they kill
>>people, pick up hookers, and other horrible things for fun, but then get
>>upset when a boob is accidentally flashed at the Super Bowl.
>
> Obveeus clearly doesn't live in a flyover state -- or at least, a
> non-urban area in a flyover state. The double-standard does exist
Bull. The 'conservative' bible belt parents are not letting their kids
watch Battlestar Galactica. The whole show was a cut at various religious
beliefs along with a healthy dose of violence, sex, and people stabbing each
other in the back for self gain.
Bible Belt parents might make the claim that watching the Superbowl is
something that they expect to be able to do as a 'family event', but they
aren't going to be saying that about the new BSG.
Ryan P
> Bull. The 'conservative' bible belt parents are not letting their kids
> watch Battlestar Galactica. The whole show was a cut at various religious
> beliefs along with a healthy dose of violence, sex, and people stabbing each
> other in the back for self gain.
>
> Bible Belt parents might make the claim that watching the Superbowl is
> something that they expect to be able to do as a 'family event', but they
> aren't going to be saying that about the new BSG.
Is it nice observing things through the Stereotype glasses? Even the
biggest Obama-worhsiping parents I know don't let their children watch
BSG because of the sex and violence of the show.
I take that back... BAD parents (who never discipline or say "no" to
their children) probably would let their kids watch BSG if they asked.
Obveeus
"Ryan P" <rdeletet...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
> On 4/29/2009 8:53 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>
>> Bull. The 'conservative' bible belt parents are not letting their kids
>> watch Battlestar Galactica. The whole show was a cut at various
>> religious
>> beliefs along with a healthy dose of violence, sex, and people stabbing
>> each
>> other in the back for self gain.
>>
>> Bible Belt parents might make the claim that watching the Superbowl is
>> something that they expect to be able to do as a 'family event', but they
>> aren't going to be saying that about the new BSG.
>
> Is it nice observing things through the Stereotype glasses?
Stereotype? I was responding to the earlier posters claiming that the bible
belt / flyover state folks would let their kids watch BSG even though they
were the typwe that didn't want to let their kids see anything with nudity.
My point was only that people that don't want their kid to see a boob
certainly are not going to want their kid watching BSG anyway.
> Even the biggest Obama-worhsiping parents I know don't let their children
> watch BSG because of the sex and violence of the show.
Ah, see, you agree with me.
> I take that back... BAD parents (who never discipline or say "no" to
> their children) probably would let their kids watch BSG if they asked.
...but bad parents aren't going to be putting up a big fuss if junior sees a
boob.
Ryan P
> Stereotype? I was responding to the earlier posters claiming that the bible
> belt / flyover state folks would let their kids watch BSG even though they
> were the typwe that didn't want to let their kids see anything with nudity.
> My point was only that people that don't want their kid to see a boob
> certainly are not going to want their kid watching BSG anyway.
Sorry, I misunderstood then. I thought it was you that was saying
that the only parents not letting their kids watch BSG were Bible Belt
parents. :)
>
>> Even the biggest Obama-worhsiping parents I know don't let their children
>> watch BSG because of the sex and violence of the show.
>
> Ah, see, you agree with me.
I do. If I had kids, they would most likely not be watching the show.
Not sure what the age cutoff would be... maybe 13-15... depending on
individual maturity.
>> I take that back... BAD parents (who never discipline or say "no" to
>> their children) probably would let their kids watch BSG if they asked.
>
> ...but bad parents aren't going to be putting up a big fuss if junior sees a
> boob.
I wonder if that means child viewing of BSG is a lot higher in cities
than in rural areas?
Rob Jensen
<rdeletet...@wi.rr.com> wrote:
>>> Even the biggest Obama-worhsiping parents I know don't let their children
>>> watch BSG because of the sex and violence of the show.
>>
>> Ah, see, you agree with me.
>
>
> I do. If I had kids, they would most likely not be watching the show.
> Not sure what the age cutoff would be... maybe 13-15... depending on
>individual maturity.
I personally suspect that it's more like 11 or 12. Sure, BSG aired in
the 10pm timeslot, but that's on a Friday night. And doesn't take
into consideration the DVDs. And honestly, I don't think anything
from the first two seasons (at least) other than the Pegasus 2-parter
(and, except that I forget when it happened, Tyrol's beating the crap
out of Callie) would have put off most parents from letting their
tweens watch the show.
-- Rob
Rob Jensen
Dude, even good parents are taken aback all the time because content
and/or context is far from clear in the way that a given show is
promoted. I think the shows that warrant such clarifications are
*extremely* rare -- the Caprica pilot just happens to be one of those
rarities.
BTW, just in case anyone's confused by the mere fact that I decided to
warn about the nudity on the day the DVD hit the stands (Okay, I'm
being a little defensive here):
1) I HIGHLY recommend the DVD as is -- I think the depiction of the V
Club was and is absolutely necessary to understanding the conflicts
between generations and between Humans and Cylons that are clearly the
central premises of the show. I also don't think that the eventual
series should pull any punches regarding the V Club or any other
content explicitly depicting the decadence of the cultures of the 12
colonies during that era, since it's at the heart of the conflicts.
And thus, I can't wait for the series -- I wish it were premiering
this summer, especially since Torchwood's upcoming season is just a
five-episode miniseries.
2) I also HIGHLY recommend NC-17 version of The Dreamers. I haven't
seen the R-Rated version, but I can't imagine the point of releasing
it.
I'm a First Amendment purist, so that inherently means that it's not
unreasonble for me to voice a warning to responsible people who I
think might be caught off-guard by the heretofore uncharacteristic
content of Caprica versus what they might be expecting based on BSG.
Yeah, it's mostly for parents, but again, I want to point out that my
original post was *extremely* ahead of virtually everybody -- I was
aiming specifically toward advising the *good* parents of the
uncharacteristic content without passing judgment on the content
itself. I was blasting Universal for its terrible packaging with
regards to helping buyers of the DVD make an informed decision about
whether or not they want to buy the DVD and/or let their kids watch
it. IMNSHO, this explicit content that is central to the DVD is NOT
apparent just from the packaging. You might think that that doesn't
call for giving people a heads up -- which is certainly your right --
but, y'know, I received an email a day or two after my original post
asking me further description of the content, so I think that giving
the heads up was worth it.
-- Rob
Obveeus
"Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
> BTW, just in case anyone's confused by the mere fact that I decided to
> warn about the nudity on the day the DVD hit the stands (Okay, I'm
> being a little defensive here):
I'm still confused about your definition of 'full frontal nudity'.
Ryan P
> I'm a First Amendment purist, so that inherently means that it's not
> unreasonble for me to voice a warning to responsible people who I
> think might be caught off-guard by the heretofore uncharacteristic
> content of Caprica versus what they might be expecting based on BSG.
> Yeah, it's mostly for parents, but again, I want to point out that my
> original post was *extremely* ahead of virtually everybody -- I was
> aiming specifically toward advising the *good* parents of the
> uncharacteristic content without passing judgment on the content
> itself. I was blasting Universal for its terrible packaging with
> regards to helping buyers of the DVD make an informed decision about
> whether or not they want to buy the DVD and/or let their kids watch
> it. IMNSHO, this explicit content that is central to the DVD is NOT
> apparent just from the packaging. You might think that that doesn't
> call for giving people a heads up -- which is certainly your right --
> but, y'know, I received an email a day or two after my original post
> asking me further description of the content, so I think that giving
> the heads up was worth it.
I wasn't disagreeing with the nudity existing at all. I was just
disagreeing with the guy I thought was saying that the only parents that
wouldn't let them watch it were Bible Belt parents.
As long as there's some sort of warning for parents to make a
judgment, they can put whatever they want on the DVD. :)
Ryan P
>> I do. If I had kids, they would most likely not be watching the show.
>> Not sure what the age cutoff would be... maybe 13-15... depending on
>>individual maturity.
>
> I personally suspect that it's more like 11 or 12. Sure, BSG aired in
> the 10pm timeslot, but that's on a Friday night. And doesn't take
> into consideration the DVDs. And honestly, I don't think anything
> from the first two seasons (at least) other than the Pegasus 2-parter
> (and, except that I forget when it happened, Tyrol's beating the crap
> out of Callie) would have put off most parents from letting their
> tweens watch the show.
11 or 12 might be a good age. Like I said though, I think it depends
on maturity of the individual child... A parental decision. :)
Pete B
> it on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
> underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
> images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers"
With incompetent parents.
Pete B
Shut...@aol.com says...
> Or to look at it another way: if a parent really, really loves Doctor
> Who, I'd warn them about the *extremely* more adult content of
> Torchwood -- highly recommending the show but strongly urging them
> that it's inappropriate for kids. Not because Jack and Ianto are a
> couple, but because in general it's a lot more violent *and* a lot
> more sexually charged than Doctor Who.
>
You should warn them about the idiotic stories ;)
Rob Jensen
wrote:
>> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
Regardless of the competence of the parents. Dude, the content is not
apparent from the just the packaging, so IMO some sort of advisory is
needed.
OTOH, at least the acting and writing on Caprica are waaaaaaaay better
than that of 90210.2.0 with the blow job scene at the start of its
pilot.
-- Rob
Pete B
rdeletet...@wi.rr.com says...
> On 4/29/2009 8:53 PM, Obveeus wrote:
>
> > Bull. The 'conservative' bible belt parents are not letting their kids
> > watch Battlestar Galactica. The whole show was a cut at various religious
> > beliefs along with a healthy dose of violence, sex, and people stabbing each
> > other in the back for self gain.
> >
> > Bible Belt parents might make the claim that watching the Superbowl is
> > something that they expect to be able to do as a 'family event', but they
> > aren't going to be saying that about the new BSG.
>
>
> Is it nice observing things through the Stereotype glasses? Even the
> biggest Obama-worhsiping parents I know don't let their children watch
> BSG because of the sex and violence of the show.
Surely its just the sex they don't want them to watch. Violence is the
american way ;)
kitekrazy
news:CQ4Kl.7278$y61....@news-server.bigpond.net.au:
It sucked. I can't watch it again
>I am looking forward to further episodes, tho a little worried re the
> religion aspects.
I'm not sure what you mean. People in general are always looking for
something spiritual and we get short sighteed into thinking "spiritual"
is always tied into a deity.
> I found the Adama revelation interesting.
That was the only part that didn't suck.
Tim McGaughy
Isn't that setting the bar pretty low?
The A-Team was better written and acted than 90210.
Rob Jensen
wrote:
IMO, it's a three-way tie with Manimal.
Homeboys From Outerspace ranks (and ranks) lower, though.
-- Rob
Pete B
Shut...@aol.com says...
> On Mon, 4 May 2009 23:26:58 +0200, Pete B <xxxh@_xsomeething.com>
> wrote:
>
> >> "Rob Jensen" <Shut...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> it on the front cover. Even if the DVD had simply had a small box
> >> underneath the Not Rated non-rating that read "Contains disturbing
> >> images and nudity that are not appropriate for younger viewers"
> >
> >With incompetent parents.
>
> Regardless of the competence of the parents. Dude, the content is not
> apparent from the just the packaging,
Which is really lousy - "lets spend all of 50 bucks on this design!"
> so IMO some sort of advisory is needed.
I suppose it wouldn't hurt (much).
> OTOH, at least the acting and writing on Caprica are waaaaaaaay better
> than that of 90210.2.0 with the blow job scene at the start of its
> pilot.
Still fairly sleepy inducing i thought. Though I like their digital
paper.