Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site terak.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!hao!noao!terak!doug
From: doug@terak.UUCP (Doug Pardee)
Newsgroups: net.movies
Subject: Re: WITNESS (spoiler)
Message-ID: <487@terak.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 8-Apr-85 11:58:59 EST
Article-I.D.: terak.487
Posted: Mon Apr  8 11:58:59 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 11-Apr-85 01:38:56 EST
References: <634@ahutb.UUCP>
Organization: Terak Corporation, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
Lines: 22

> What I do not remember anyone mentioning
> about the film is its essential hypocrisy.

I don't think the violence was hypocrisy.  I saw it as an important
part of the story; the contrast between the violent life and the Amish
life.

But I too am bothered by the inclusion of the "tit shot".  This had
nothing to do with the story and the behavior was totally out of
character for both Rachel and John.  It was included strictly to get
the coveted "R" rating.

How on earth did classic movies ever get made during the Golden Age of
Hollywood, when the Hayes Office wouldn't allow tit shots?  I mean, if
Casablanca was being made today, it'd get a G rating and nobody'd take
it seriously.

I think it's time that the ratings people allowed a movie producer to
change the assigned rating toward the more restrictive ratings.  Then
we can have "PG-13" and "R" movies without having to mangle the story.
-- 
Doug Pardee -- Terak Corp. -- !{hao,ihnp4,decvax}!noao!terak!doug