Too much cleavage


Was anyone else bothered by the excessive cleavage at the beginning of the movie? I left the movie so I don't know if it continued after that point. I'm so tired of running into this sexualized media content. I expected it least from a Mormon movie. Maybe Mormons are getting desensitized by the media just like everyone else. I'm writing the people responsible for this and I invite you to do the same if you agree:

Producer: Jeff T. Miller, Larry H. Miller, Scott Swofford
Director: Sterling Van Wagenen

reply

No. If that's how women wore their dresses back at that time, then why not portray it accurately?

BTW, I don't even remember the scenes with cleavage in it.

"Do the words "Orenthal James Simpson" mean anything to you?" -F.M.

reply

I saw many modest dresses used for many characters in the previous movies in this trilogy and they were accurate to the period while being modest at the same time. Why not kill two birds with one stone - portray the period accurately AND portray modesty? In the name of basic modesty and decency I would expect Mormons to have made the choice for modesty, but they didn't in the first part of this movie, and that's what disappoints me.

BTW - I DO remember the low cleavage during the first 15 minutes of the film and my wife and I walked out because of it. I remember recommending many movies to my parents and when I watched those movies with them, I found myself cringing at the parts I had "forgotten" were in them because I had been desensitized by the barrage of sexualized media around me. I think such is the case now and it's sad.

reply

It's a good thing you walked out. The rest of the movie wasn't anything special. Easily the worst of the 3 movies.

"Do the words "Orenthal James Simpson" mean anything to you?" -F.M.

reply

lol - well, I'm glad I didn't miss much.

reply

Well, first of all this is not made by the LDS aka Mormon Church, and as such you cannot say that Mormons are not modest. I would invite you to visit BYU if you doubt that claim. Also, I bet you dont get to see very many movies if these films were too immodest for you and your wife. Not that you are missing much by any means.

reply

I don't remember any either, but I don't remember anything at all offensive about this movie. But I don't remember anything challenging about it either. It was easily the weakest of the three.

reply

I don't want to be too aggressive but it seems like you are being extremly narrow minded. Though the church openly denounces pornography and sexually degrading media, there is room for an appreciation of the human body and the sexuality that is natural in each of us. Our religion is one of the only Christian religions that openly embraces sex as an action that we should find pleasure in, though only in marriage.
Showing a little cleavage isn't going to be offensive to those who recognize that women have breasts is part of the anatomical sturcture which characterizes women. It seems silly and puritanical to attempt to rub every inch of sexuality out of our images. Could one not argue that the Arnold Friberg paintings in the Book of Mormon represent masculine gender in a sexual manner that was fully approved by the First Presidency?
For the most part I don't care for this most recent wave of Mormon cinema, (except for Napoleon Dynamite, Nacho Libre, and maybe Brigham City), but it seems like the fillmakers are constrained to appease an LDS audience that knows nothing about, art, cinema, or almost anything else that happens outside of Utah Valley. The way I read Spencer Kimball's invitation for more LDS artists means we need to make ourselves familiar with art and media and not make a fuss over a little bit of clevage. I don't think he was encouraging engaging in pornography, but certainly he was encouraging an appreciation for the masterful paintings of the European art world that frequently featured-(gasp)-nudity.

reply

I just saw the movie with my family. Are you for real? That WAS NOT excessive cleavage. I am about as straight of an arrow as they come and it did not bother me in the slightest. Now if her dress had plunged to her navel that would be some thing else. Its too bad you left...you missed a pretty good show...and there was not any more "excessive cleavage."

reply

Maybe you should focus your energy into something more creative than in being offended and trying to incite the board with a bunch of drama and excitement about cleavage. Its more than a little silly.

-Todd
www.toddlbauerle.com

reply

Some good excessive cleavage is Disney's 1993 "The Three Musketeers", one of my favorite movies. Check it out.

"You've never seen me panic. When I panic, I make this face ." -F.M.

reply

[deleted]

I didn't notice any excess cleavage.

reply

my family and i thought there was excessive cleavege in the beginning, but thankfully, that ended. we were surprised since it was a mormon film( we are Mormon). but apparantly the crew and producers and stuff werent. idk. if they werent LDS, it would make a little more sense. i wish that wouldnt have been in there. as someone said, the body is sacred and women have breasts...true we know that, they dont need to be shown off. "its whats hidden thats most desired." i personally am sorry to all those who were offended by the cleavege. i did still enjoy yhe movie though

reply

I actually ended up writing a (slightly rude, sorry) email to Sterling Van Wagenen:

-----
Sterling,

I was really looking forward to this movie but my wife and I left after the first 10 minutes after being exposed to tons of cleavage. I spent those 10 minutes studying the popcorn and other sticky substances on the theater floor. Do you have no concept of Mormon modesty? I'm disappointed and disgusted. Could you explain to me why you put this type of _unnecessary_ content in your movie? Are you a Mormon?
-----

I then received the following reply from him:

-----
Yes, I'm LDS. There seemed to be no problem with the cleavage when we screened it for President Hinckley, President Monson, seven members of the Quorum of the Twelve and fifteen Seventies. Maybe you're the one who has the problem.

Best Wishes,
Sterling Van Wagenen
-----

To which I replied:

-----
Sterling,

Thanks for the reply. Perhaps I do have the problem. I'll write the general authorities you mentioned and find out what they thought of the cleavage. I assume by your response (and by you including it in the movie) that you don't have a problem with it, am I correct?
-----

To which he replied:

-----
By all means, you should write the Brethren. This is an issue that certainly demands their time and attention.

Best,
Sterling Van Wagenen
-----

To which I replied:

-----
Sterling,

I think I'm picking up on your sarcasm. I agree with you - this specific issue in and of itself probably doesn't demand their attention. However, the issue that does demand their attention deals with pornography addiction and the various ways that people become gradually desensitized and eventually fully involved with such an addiction - sexualized media being one of those that they speak about often in conference. The cleavage you chose to put into your film puts your film into the category of sexualized media and therefore falls into the larger category of pornography addiction which is, based on their recent talks, currently demanding a large portion of their attention.

Yes, perhaps I'm just oversensitive as you have implied, but I believe in standing up against all forms of indecency regardless of whether it has "Mormon Made" stamped on it or not and regardless of whether you think it is important or not. President Hinckley himself told us all to stand up to these things and so that's what I'm doing and I'm surprised by your reaction to my standing up. Perhaps they looked away and remained silent during the screening, respecting your agency to choose what you put into your own movies. Perhaps you're right and they were fine with it and I'm just oversensitive - watching some period-correct dress displaying fairly large portions of a woman's breasts is just fine. Based on their talks in general conference though, I find it hard to believe that the latter case is true and that the implied endorsement you have offered me is how they really feel about the issue of sexualized media.
-----

Then I wrote President Hinckley and Thomas S. Monson and received a letter from the office of the first presidency that said (I'm paraphrasing) that it was wrong for Sterling to imply an endorsement and that if anyone has ever listened in General Conference or to any of the General Authorities' talks or statements on the matter, they would know that modesty is extremely important and that immodesty goes against both the doctrines of the Church and Christ's teachings.

I think we as a people have become desensitized to immodesty by the constant barrage of sexualized media we see at every turn. This is evidenced by how many here "didn't even notice the cleavage."

Yes, sexuality is important and wonderful within the confines of a healty marriage, but as we are more and more accepting of immodesty, it will continue to get worse and worse (as it already has been over the past 30 years).

We're a bunch of frogs in a slowly warming pot that will boil us some day. At what point will we stand up? I've chosen to stand up now.

reply

r-cronk: thank you so much. im very appreciative of your concern and action. i completly agree with you.

reply

R-Cronk, I have a question:

How many other movies have you walked out of in your life? It seems to me that if you walked out on a bit of barely-PG-level cleavage, then I'm guessing you've never been able to sit through an entire movie without being disgusted and walking out. Do you also walk out if a movie starts out with a man getting up out of bed and fixes himself a cup of coffee? BTW, I'm also Mormon, and yes, I did notice the cleavage at the beginning. Sorry if you don't like it, but that was the style of the time, and the female character (Caroline) happened to not be a Mormon. You'll notice (if you watch it all the way through, and not turn it off) that all of the female Mormons depicted in the film are dressed modestly.
There is a difference between following rules and being what I grew up to know some people as being called "Nazi Peter Priesthoods"; Molly Mormons for women. You know, someone who feels uncomfortable kissing his wife of 3 months because it's "too early in the relationship, we need to get to know each other better." (Yes, I knew someone like that). You're borderline treading that path, but if that's the way that you wish to live, that's your prerogative.
As for the media being a "sexualized media", well, I have to agree with that. A lot of people tend to think that sex sells, which is sadly true, but certainly not necessary to make money. Also, not everything is as sexual as you think. You can take pretty much any phrase of any song, and Church leaders will erroneously automatically think that they're talking about sex or a type of sex act. In some cases it's true, but in many other cases, no. You can take any song out of the Hymnbook and turn it into a sexual connotation, but it's certainly not what they're talking about.

reply

[deleted]

Filky - I've walked out of a few movies in my life. I have also changed a lot throughout my life. I wasn't always this sensitive. I try to find out on www.screenit.com first what's in a movie before going so I won't have to walk out. I've gone through many rounds of getting rid of DVD's in my collection. It's been a long process. The more I stay away from this garbage, the more sensitive I get to it.

The last time this happened was when I was away from media for two years, immersed in the gospel, on my mission (which I went on at age 25 since I was too busy being a partying atheist to go at age 19) - I got home and was shocked. I think going on a mission was the best thing I could do and its effect was to resensitize myself to sexualized media. I see nothing wrong with that. That's what I'm doing right now. The pioneers didn't have sexualized media like we do today and they seemed to be able to make it to heaven and survive without it.

There were many dress styles in that time period and there were modest dresses and immodest dresses. As a Mormon director, I'd choose the modest styles because they go along with my belief and the immodest dresses add nothing to the movie except immodesty for no reason.

The logical question is "where do we draw the line?" Exactly how much cleavage is ok? Exactly how much violence is ok? Exactly how much innuendo is ok? Have the general authorities already answered these questions? Will we follow them or not? If we can't follow them on something so simple, how can we expect to follow them on something much more difficult? These are the questions I've asked myself and the answers are pretty straightforward if I'm honest.

I'm still working on avoiding violence in media - that's been a gradual process too.

How much of these things will be going on in the movies in the Celestial Kingdom? If the answer is "none" then why not live that law right now? Why live in a way that is incompatible with how we profess to want to live after this life?

reply

A couple points for r-cronk to consider. Have you never been to a public swimming pool? I recommend you stay away. Even the aging relief socity presidents in one-piece swimming suits might be too much for you. Even my dear wife, Lord bless her, struggles to keep her assets 100% covered. I suppose if I were weak enough, I could get off on the mere thought that under all the clothing you prefer, there's still a lot of skin, as if burkas would gurantee the elimination of all impure thoughts. Consider an omniscient Heavenly Father looking down upon all His children. Is there anything He doesn't comprehend? Would President Hinckley run away from someone who's dress revealed cleavage? Would he even notice? It's all about where your mind is. On my mission I occasionally taught women who stripped to their waist and nursed their babies not 5 feet in front of me in the middle of a formal gospel discussion. In your world, I should have ran away and complained to my mission president. It only threw me off until I matured enough to keep focused on the issue at hand, controlling my thoughts, keeping the Spirit, maintaining the love of Christ in my heart. With a nod to the Apostle Paul, if it's a sin to you then you better not do it nor indulge, but that doesn't make it a sin for someone else, nor does it justify you to critically judge another's choices, whether to dress that way , to make a movie that way, or to watch said movie.

reply

dhale-4,

Thanks for your thoughts. I had similar experiences on my mission and have had similar experiences at public places. I get what you're saying and I agree with you. I know there's a reason that the General Authorities have told us to not see R-rated movies. Christ was perfect and wouldn't have any impure thoughts but would he then go to R-rated movies because he can handle it? I heard a story about Elder Maxwell where he was at some social function and an immodestly dressed woman came out to sing and he quietly bowed his head until she was off the stage and I think Christ might do the same.

My point was different though. If a Mormon is going to make a movie about Mormons for an audience of Mormons, and he has 100% control of everything that will be in that movie (that people will be paying to see over and over), why not make it in harmony with the standards of Mormon modesty? It seems so simple to me. Yes, out in society, we have little control of what others will do and so we control our thoughts, look away if necessary, but this movie is a completely Mormon controlled environment and that's why I was so disappointed in it.

reply

How much of these things will be going on in the movies in the Celestial Kingdom? If the answer is "none" then why not live that law right now? Why live in a way that is incompatible with how we profess to want to live after this life?
No cleavage in the CK ? That by itself is probably a reason not to care if one ends up there.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

reply

Thank you, r-cronk, for sharing this correspondence and thank you, also, for (per the admonition of President Hinckley) standing for something!

My husband and I have also walked out of many movies because of morality issues and/or offensive language. Maybe the Muslims do have the right idea with their thobes and abayas which cover the bodies. At least, when I go to the malls here in Saudi Arabia, I'm not shocked and disgusted, like when I visit the States!

reply

Judging from the text of your reply (along with several others here) you probably shouldn't have a mirror in your bathroom that reflects below the neck line and you and your husband should probably keep your garments on even during those "intimate" moments.

If you spent less time being "shocked and disgusted" at what people look like on the outside, you might begin to realize an even greater truth:

Most people should make you disgusted for WHO they are, and for the stupid things that they view as truth (like Pay Lay Ale).

reply

According to LDS beliefs, seeing yourself or your spouse in this way is appropriate. Putting someone else's spouse on the big screen and watching it isn't.

Modesty is important for many reasons and if you're LDS, you hopefully understand that. Unfortunately, LDS and others are understanding that importance less and less each year.

There is a story in the Book of Mormon (a book of LDS scripture) about the tree of life. In part of that story, it talks about people in a great and spacious building pointing the finger of scorn at those who are partaking of the fruit of the tree of life. I think we have seen this type of activity in this thread by several who are standing in that building and mocking those who are trying their best to follow their beliefs and the teachings of Christ. Seeing this happen here is for me just one more example of the truthfulness of that book and that story.

reply

You give Mormons a bad name cronk. You are the stereotype that makes people think negatively about the religion. How does that help your cause?

reply

krisb22 - Let me make sure I understand your logic. A person standing up for conservative values that match the doctrines of the LDS church gives the church a bad name. I don't get it. Are you LDS? Exactly what stereotype am I causing people to come up with?

reply

[deleted]

nosyrb - No, we're trying to individually send a message to movie producers to let them know that we don't want movies with this kind of content in them. If everyone did this, this type of content would decrease and our children would have less access to it.

littleloulou-2 - Thanks. I don't think anyone needs to go to any extremes - people just need to keep some body parts off the movie screens, billboards, magazine covers, posters, etc. - out from in front of our children.

missteenvogue - Silly? I have worked with legislators, prosecutors, porn-addicts, convicted child molesters, children who have been molested, and scientists studying the effects of pornography on the human brain. In the vast majority of cases that I'm aware of, the perpetrators started off being conditioned by repeated exposure to sexualized media (much like what was found in this movie and what you can regularly find on TV and in malls, etc.), which prepared and conditioned their minds to more readily accept the pornography that they would surely run into and end up pursuing beginning around age 12. The very few who don't fit into that profile were either introduced to indecent material earlier or were themselves molested by others who fit the above profile.

I have children who are girls and it's my responsibility to protect them in any way I can. One of those ways is to try to stop this creeping sexualization of the media that we see before us each day. Calling it silly (or normalizing or minimizing it by comparing it to other forms of indecency in our society) is just one of the many ways for some of us to rationalize "sitting back" while an increasing number of our youth get molested and addicted. I'm at the front lines in this battle and things are changing more quickly each year - the number of people affected would astound you. Everyone please wake up.

Based on the current research about what teens are doing with their photo and video cell phones, as just one example, you can give our society a few more years and you'll start seeing the fruits of our "sitting back" - but by then it will be too late to do something about it.

Those who are LDS have been counseled to get their own houses in order and then go out and be active in standing up against the evils that exist in our society. That's what I'm doing, and I'm sometimes surprised at people's reaction and apathy to what the prophet has told us to do. After years of seeing such apathy, you can begin to see why I was so shocked and disgusted to see this sexualized media creeping into Mormon genre movies - compounded by the apathetic and sarcastic reaction of the (Mormon) director of this movie.

All of this apathy, sarcasm, and minimizing is just spitting in the faces of the people I work with in the addiction recovery program and the victims of the crimes I mentioned above.

Just so this post isn't entirely negative and emotion laden, on a positive note, I am personally seeing many people start to escape the addictions that sexualized media has begun in their lives - it's a slow and painful process though that generally leaves victims, broken families, and children in its wake.

reply

[deleted]

DianeBelmont - Let me know when you see a 12-year-old boy breastfeeding in a sexualized way in public, and we'll get some people arrested. I think you have missed the point - maybe you were just trying to be funny.

reply

[deleted]

Yes, I was very surprised by that. (Not the cleavage itself, only because they actually showed it) I understand that the point was to be historically accurate, but I mean, seriously. The movie did not need that. They could have been nice to the people watching and not put that in.

The people who made this movie were very much aware that it was based on an LDS book, and knowing that, should have taken measures to make it look a little more LDS. I´m not saying that LDS people don´t dress like that, because some do, and I´m not saying that other LDS films do not include things like this, because unfortunately, they do too. And it´s pathetic. If they want to attract the LDS crowd, and those looking for a decent movie, they need to take the right measures.

reply