This is topic R-rated movies being shown in school in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003772

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-20-2004, 10:31 PM:
 
Here's an article from the Billings (Montana) Gazette regarding a controversy about R-rated movies being shown in a high school. Aside from the questions about whether it's appropriate to show R films to skool kids, I'm wondering if this kind of thing is allowed by the film companies?

(Link at end of story)

Skyview principal: Wrong to show R film
By JOHN FITZGERALD
Of The Gazette Staff

Chris Jones thinks showing the movie “Tin Cup” during a health enhancement class is ridiculous.

Skyview principal Bob Whalen completely agrees.

Parents complained during a school board meeting Monday night about the film, which was recently shown to a health education class of Skyview juniors and seniors. It is rated R for brief nudity and foul language.

Interviews with teachers, administrators, and parents have found that the use of cinematic movies in general, and R-rated movies in specific, is rare. But it has occurred.

“With very rare exceptions, R-rated movies don't belong in classrooms,” Jones said. “Parents should be notified if anything at or above the PG-13 rating is going to be shown. … Showing R-rated movies opens up a lot of problems as far as I'm concerned.”

Whalen agrees.

“Tin Cup's” showing “was a wake-up call,” he said. “The movie is not educationally related for any reason so the second half wasn't shown and the teacher was talked to about it. And we're just moving on. Was it poor judgment? Yes. Was it done out of malice? No. She knows it was wrong.”

Jones is not ready to simply move on. She and several other parents have called for the issue to be addressed in school district policy. The Board of Trustees agreed, asking its Education Committee to look at the issue of R-rated movies.

While there is no current policy, there is a districtwide procedure - in place before the movie was shown - that requires any film shown in class to be “relevant to the educational environment.”

Whalen said R-rated films must be reviewed by the principal, all foul language and nudity must be edited out, and students must have a permission slip signed by a parent. Those who do not have a permission slip will be assigned an alternative assignment with no loss of class points.

School procedure regarding the showing of R-rated films “obviously wasn't followed with ‘Tin Cup',” Whalen said.

West High principal Dennis Sulser said he wants teachers to talk to him if there's a question about a movie.

“R-rated movies are certainly questionable,” he said.

He said editing objectionable portions of a film is easy. Just turn the movie off, he said.

He added that movies in general aren't shown very often. “Watching a full-length movie is not the best use of class time, although at times it does happen,” he said, adding that there are some scenes in some movies that are appropriate to use to emphasize an English, social studies or health concepts.

Jones' daughter, who saw “Tin Cup,” also was shown the R-rated “Platoon” in an English class last year, although she opted out of watching the movie. Some of her other children have seen portions of “Apocalypse Now” in an English class while studying the Vietnam War.

The issue will begin its process through the administration at the Dec. 13 Education Committee meeting when Trustee Conrad Stroebe, the committee chair, will ask the committee how they want to proceed.

“We're going to take our time,” Stroebe said. “This is an important issue. Anytime we change policy we need to be cognizant of the process we follow to make sure everyone is heard.”

One of those who wants to be heard is Trustee Gene Jarussi. While he doesn't defend “Tin Cup,” he does bring up other movies.

In a letter to board members, Jarussi wrote “there are R-rated movies that I think might be very appropriate in the classroom. For example, Schlindler's List is R-rated, but I think it addresses the Holocaust in a way that no verbal lecture could. … If you ban R-rated films, what next? R-rated paintings by those we refer to as the masters? R-rated sculptures? Reprints of art found in the Catholic cathedrals in Rome?”

(Link: http://www.billingsgazette.com/index.php?display=rednews/2004/11/18/build/local/35-movies.inc )
 

---

Posted by Justin West (Member # 920) on 12-20-2004, 10:48 PM:
 
I wonder if they'd have a problem showing "Birth of a Nation" during civil-war-era discussions??
 

---

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 12-20-2004, 11:12 PM:
 
Maybe they should start there own R-Card for students like GKC

I saw more traumatizing things in health class than what any R rated movie could ever show
 

---

Posted by Mark J. Marshall (Member # 1409) on 12-20-2004, 11:15 PM:
 
I wonder if this is one of those schools that doesn't let anyone say "Merry Christmas" because they're afraid of offending someone.
 

---

Posted by Carl Martin (Member # 1146) on 12-21-2004, 04:01 AM:
 

quote:

---

Whalen said R-rated films must be reviewed by the principal, all foul language and nudity must be edited out,

---

i wonder if they do this with books as well.

there's a lot wrong with schools.

carl
 

---

Posted by Mike Pennell (Member # 1692) on 12-21-2004, 04:37 AM:
 
ok, here's my rant: what does Tin Cup have to do with anything health related? I understand Apocalypse Now being based on Joseph Conrad's Heart of Darkness and Platoon as a "history" based film, but what is so educational about Tin Cup? Dont tell me because its about golf, thus being a sport thus a health related issue, thats lame.
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 12-21-2004, 09:55 AM:
 
There was a "ban" on teachers showing R-Rated movies in my school, too. Simply because of the fact that nobody was over 18 yet except some of the seniors, and a teacher can't "force" you to watch (or give a quiz on, etc.) an R-Rated movie if you're not old enough.

They did have a type of "r-card" which was just a permission slip the teacher handed out in the beginning of the year, and was kept on file. There were always a few who never turned theirs in and had to leave whenever an R film was shown. (Which was funny, because it was usually the "tough guys" hahaha!)

Movies can be shown in classrooms under the "educational purposes" clause of the Fair Use Act. If the movie was to be "broadcast" over the school's closed circuit TV system, then public performance rights would be in order. But if it's in a classroom setting for educational purposes, they're in the clear.

The school also had a list of "approved" educational movies which also included a handfull of classics or kids movies just for fun. If a teacher wanted to show something not on the list to a class, they would have to submit a reason as to how the film enhances the class, to avoid teachers taking a "break" by just popping in a video. If it was an R-Rated movie not on the list, they had to have a VERY good reason!

Stuff that's R that was on the list were things like Schindler's List, Malcom X and Platoon. The only time I remember a teacher putting in an R-Rated, Non-Educational film was on the last week of school when a teacher brought in A Bronx Tale. Hey kids, just because the movie says every other word doesn't mean you're suddenly allowed to!! Maybe that's why the ban was enacted... because of dumb, parroting children.

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 12-21-2004, 10:06 AM:
 
http://eduscapes.com/seeds/copy.html

quote:

---

Use of Rental or Purchased “HOME USE ONLY”
If an educational institution purchases a copy of a videocassette or DVD with a warning label “FOR HOME USE ONLY”, it is permissible to use the tape for face-to-face instruction with students (Section 110 - 1, Copyright Act). The key here is that the program is incorporated as part of the systematic teaching activities of the curriculum in which it is being used. The program may not be shown for other than instructional purposes unless a specific agreement is entered into at the time of purchase. The rental of a FOR HOME USE ONLY videotape for classroom use brings issues of contract law into play. Basically, when one rents something, they are agreeing to all conditions of the rental agreement, stated or implied.

---

quote:

---

Copyright:

The video cassettes and compact discs in the library are subject to the Revised Copyright Act of 1976, Title 17 of the U.S. Code, Sections 101-810, which took effect on January 1, 1978. The library prohibits the use of these materials in any way that violates Federal or State laws. Faculty, staff and students who disregard the copyright policy do so at their own risk and must assume liability for their actions. Videos are for home use and may not be shown outside a family residence, or at a place where a substantial number of people are gathered, regardless of whether admission is charged. Videos may be used in the classroom under the allowances of "fair-use" provided they follow these restrictions:

The performance must be by instructors or by pupils;
The performance must be in connection with face-to-face teaching activities
The entire audience is involved in the teaching activity;
The entire audience is in the same room or general area;
The teaching activities are conducted by a non-profit institution;
The performance takes place in a classroom or similar place devoted to instruction;
The videotape is lawfully made or the person responsible had no reason to believe that the videotape was unlawfully made.


Copying a work in its entirety is allowed only in emergency situations, regardless of its intended use. Patrons may refer to the FBI warning at the beginning of the video which states:

The motion picture contained in this videocassette is protected under the copyright laws of the United States and other countries. This cassette is sold for home use only and all other rights are expressly reserved by the copyright owner of such motion picture. Any copying or public performance of such motion picture is strictly prohibited and may subject the offender to civil liability and severe criminal penalties. (Title 17, United States Code, Sections 501 and 506).

Dupré library reserves the right to refuse circulation privileges to patrons who knowingly and willfully violate copyright law in their use of library materials including videos and compact discs. If you are in doubt about the use of a work check with the University's Copyright Handbook or with the Copyright Office.

---

quote: Justin West

---

I wonder if they'd have a problem showing "Birth of a Nation" during civil-war-era discussions??

---

...or Jüd Suß in teaching about the Holocaust?

A much more difficult issue where BOAN is concerned, though, because it was a genuine milestone in film history (e.g. it practically invented many aspects of the continuity editing system). You can't ignore that because of the problematic way it deals with racial issues, but nor can you ignore the racial issues and deal with the stylistic ones in isolation.

But I can't for the life of me imagine any way that showing Tin Cup to a bunch of schoolkids serves any educational purpose.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-21-2004, 10:48 AM:
 
Showgirls on career day.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 12-21-2004, 12:50 PM:
 
As a teacher here are my personal policies about showing R-rated films in class:

When I worked in the local high schools, full length R-rated films were out of the question. I learned this even before I was certified by speaking with a non-tenured teacher in a neighboring district who was fired for showing Platoon to his sophomores without any parental consent. However, on the other side of the coin, clips from R-rated features showing a visual context to the lecture can be fair game. The cautionary note here is that the clip must be free of sex, nudity, or overly explicit foul language (think of Carlin's comedy act). It has been my experience that most parents wont bitch at all about the violence in a film, but one cuss word (which their son or daughter already are perfect masters of) then watch out!

Now that I teach college the gloves are off. I do limit my full length films to just two. In 20th Century World, I show Enemy at the Gates, which I don't even know the rating; in American Involvement in Vietnam, its Path to War, an HBO production. Granted, these aren't Full Metal Jacket or Apocalypse Now, but they have their moments high schools (and some deans) would frown upon.

Teachers can go overboard on showing film in place of their teaching. I actually see it a lot, so the Tin Cup contraversy didn't strike me as odd at all. In my opinion, film has a place - a very good place - in the classroom. The key is that it must represent the lecture, or part of the lecture perfect enough to provide context, but not to teach the lecture. So many high school teachers now are fed the crap by their university professors to be multi-media and let technology take over THEIR duties for them. Too bad when one thinks about it.
 

---

Posted by Dean Kollet (Member # 1789) on 12-21-2004, 12:55 PM:
 
our teacher had no problem (and neither did the entire class) with the Matrix when we had our discussion on Velocity in our Physics class.
 

---

Posted by Aaron Mehocic (Member # 15) on 12-21-2004, 01:14 PM:
 
For the sake of a discussion on media bias in my National Government course, I showed Fairenheit 911 one day and Fairenhype 911 the next. Nobody had any problem with either film, but I'll never do that again since both films will become more and more irrelavent as time passes.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-21-2004, 03:06 PM:
 
Under what sort of license do you exhibit these films?
 

---

Posted by Dustin Mitchell (Member # 372) on 12-21-2004, 03:50 PM:
 
I would assume it falls under that whole 'Fair use' thing; it is a government class after all.
 

---

Posted by Ben Holley (Member # 2247) on 12-21-2004, 04:18 PM:
 
I saw amistad my junior year of high school for my music appreciation class, she claimed it had to do with showing us kids about slavery and the spirituals slaves used to sing in the fields, I think she just wanted to show us all full frontal nudity and savage beatings in school, I dont know how she slipped this past the administration
 

---

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 12-21-2004, 05:28 PM:
 
I don't care if it is in a historical context or not ... a school does not have the right to trump a parent's right to censor one's own child. Believe it or not, there are quite a few parents out there that would feel it would not be beneficial for their child to view a movie such as Tin Cup. There is absolutely no redeeming educational value in this movie. If an R-rated film is to be shown, permission should be obtained from the parents first ... with no repurcussions for the kids not being allowed to view the film.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-21-2004, 11:05 PM:
 
a school does not have the right to trump a parent's right to censor one's own child.

If you mean that in any absolute sense then it's a ridiculous assertion. If a school want to teach Pythagoras and the 'rents have a problem with that then too bad. Kid either learns it or takes an F.
 

---

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 12-21-2004, 11:31 PM:
 
It all has to do with reasonable expectation ... a parent reasonably expects that their child will be educated, however, it is not reasonable to expect that R-rated movies including profane language & sexuality/nudity/graphic violence would be a part of that education. Likewise, many sex ed programs require parental approval, as they should, as many parents would prefer to educate their child in their own home ... since when did sex ed become the responsibility of the government, and not of the household?
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 12-21-2004, 11:38 PM:
 
Hahahaha...that's an easy one. Since they pretty much abdicated doing a good job of it resulting in rampant teen pregnancy and STD rates.
 

---

Posted by Randy Stankey (Member # 64) on 12-22-2004, 12:21 AM:
 
My first problem with this whole thing is that, somehow, people believe that the rating system is sacrosanct. It is not. How can assigning a letter (or letters) to a movie change the character of that movie from something that is educational or quasi-educational (To turn a phrase: "Edu-tainment") into something that has no redeeming value whatsoever?

Is watching the movie Black Rain any more or less relevant to a class lecture on world government simply because somebody wrote a letter "R" (or "MA" or whatever) after the title?

Doesn't everybody here (and most of the American population) know that ratings are often assigned almost arbitrarily as a marketing tool instead of what they might have been intended to be in the first place? A GUIDELINE for determining whether one wanted to watch a movie?

How many movies do you know where they drop the "F-Bomb" or flash a tit just to bump the movie up to the "Adult" demographic? How many movies do you know that SHOULD have been rated but weren't for some (supposed) marketing reason?

Letter rating movies had a lot more meaning in days past. Today, I'd say it's almost irrelevant. Most movies tell you more about their inclusion of "possibly objectional content" in the trailers, posters or even the TITLE than anything else!

For cripe's sake! These people make it sound like they were showing PORNO FLIX in the classroom!

Do parents have the right to say whether their children can or can not watch a certain movie? YES!

Should the Principal of the school have the right to say to a teacher, "No. Don't show movies just for entertainment."? Of COURSE!

Just don't make a Federal case out of it! Stuff like this happens all the time! It HAS happened for a long time. IT WILL continue to happen for a long time!

When I was in High School, my science teacher gave us quizzes every Thursday. IF the class average on any week's quiz was a "B" or better (above 80%) he would get us a reel of cartoons on 16mm and play them in Friday in class. It was our reward for studying. Heck! The Principal even stopped in once in a while! He'd look in the door, see us watching a cartoon and say, <Thumbs Up> "Good Job! </Thumbs Up>

Maybe that idea of gettng permission slips from parents at the beginning of the year is a good idea but these people getting bent out of shape over a stinkin' movie is nothing but a batch of crap!

Sheesh! Get OVER it already! Will you, people!?
 

---

Posted by Mike Spaeth (Member # 524) on 12-22-2004, 01:20 AM:
 
Parents are abdicating everything to the school's nowadays ... up to and including breakfast
 

---

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-22-2004, 01:55 AM:
 
I don't have much of a problem with the movies themselves, what bugs me is that they are SHOWING MOVIES AT ALL. The teachers are hired to teach, not show "Tin Cup" during school hours. (Now if each movie screened was followed by a lecture about how much better that movie would have been on a big theatre screen, then maybe I'd be in favor of the whole thing.)

That said, I don't care how good "Saving Private Ryan" or "Platoon" are, they are still entertainment movies and contain large globs of fiction. Kids are screwed up enough without their sense of history (what little they have, that is) being skewed by fictional movies presented as "lessons" in the classroom.

Also FYI, the teachers in Billings went on strike during the 2003/4 school year for higher wages. They won most of what they were striking for, largely due to the backing of the people in Billings. I'd bet if they struck again today, the people wouldn't be as "behind" them as they were during that strike.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-22-2004, 03:54 AM:
 

quote: Randy Stankey

---

My first problem with this whole thing is that, somehow, people believe that the rating system is sacrosanct. It is not. How can assigning a letter (or letters) to a movie change the character of that movie from something that is educational or quasi-educational (To turn a phrase: "Edu-tainment") into something that has no redeeming value whatsoever?

---

quote: Mike Spaeth

---

Parents are abdicating everything to the school's nowadays ... up to and including breakfast

---

Schools are wrongly having to function as surrogate parents for more and more kids because a growing number of adults are totally selfish, pathetic, immature failures as parents.

Divorce rates are up. Some single parents are absentee parents, just leaving the kids at home alone while they're out at all hours trying to get laid or get high. There's a lot of kids here in Oklahoma being raised by grandparents or aunts/uncles because both biological parents are such irredeemable fuck ups they can't be trusted with kids at all. And the fuck up parents love it! More time to party!! Lots of kids in the public school systems have no positive adult role models in their lives at all. So an increasing burden falls down onto the schools.

The whole idea of kids having to have permission slips signed so they can be taught sex ed, certain Darwininan subjects in science, etc. is really kind of backward these days. Many parents aren't there to do their damned jobs. So maybe they need to sign a slip if they don't want their kids taught a certain subject. If the slip doesn't come back signed, then "junior" has to take the class by default.
 

---

Posted by Jeremy Fuentes (Member # 2135) on 12-22-2004, 09:28 AM:
 
Ok, so parents are getting mad when these teachers show kids R rated movies when they should be teaching instead....are these the same parents that drop their kids off at the movies(for hours at a time), and even get off the car to buy an R rated ticket for their kids, when they should be raising them, rather than having us babysit them?
 

---

Posted by Ken Layton (Member # 133) on 12-22-2004, 10:20 AM:
 
The only feature length movies I saw in school were in English Literature class. Since these were usually rented 16mm prints from Swank, Budget, Modern, or Films Inc. we generally got them 'serialized' by running one reel a day. Occassionaly we would have an assembly where I would be the projectionist and do changeovers!

Other classes like science would run movies like the Bell Science series (with Dr. Frank Baxter) and of course there was always those anti-drug movies like "LSD Trip Or Trap".
 

---

Posted by Thomas Procyk (Member # 1170) on 12-22-2004, 10:38 AM:
 
I remember watching 16mm in science class, and I'm not even that old!

One film I remember which was about 2 hours was from the 60's and called "Hemo the Magnificent" which talked about Hemoglobin, whatever that is. Couldn't hear the film because whenever they would say the character's name, someone in the class would yell out, "HOMO the Magnificent!"

I remember the teacher stopping the film many times to correct some medical or scientific information they were talking about that was kinda dated. Most of it was, "Nobody knows the cause of ______ yet" and she'd stop it and say, "Yes, now they do."

My biggest gripe is with English teachers who assign us a novel and go on and on and on about how the movie butchers the book and how it misses a lot of stuff... then they make us sit through the movie after we've read the novel! Great Gatsby and Scarlett Letter come to mind right away, as I had to be woken up many times and finally sent out because I couldn't stay awake.

=TMP=
 

---

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 12-22-2004, 12:23 PM:
 
Stuff we ran in the early '70s at Rancho High School for our various English Lit classes: Lord of the Flies, Fahrenheit 451, Ring of Bright Water, Airport (scope!), Hotel, The Haunting (B&W scope!), The Innocents (B&W scope!), ...tick...tick...tick... For the theater and music department we ran Sweet Charity and Funny Girl for notes (we were doing stage productions of both of these). All presented in the way Thomas despises, as comparisons of screenplays versus original works, and talking about adapting literary works in general.

We too ran them serially in class (actually, assemblies of all English Lit sections that met that hour), about one reel a day, repeated 5-6 times. We also ran the film uninterrupted after school for those that cared to catch it that way. For the musicals we bought out the Huntridge theater for a night and got to see them in 35mm. Everything else was 16mm except for Lord of the Flies which we bagged off-the-air from channel 5 on 1" tape. Gord's post below reminds me that our 16mm was also a pair of B&H's, not Marc's but 1200W incandescents lighting a custom-built (by yours truly) 6x16' screen.

Of those titles, only Sweet Charity raised a few eyebrows (the idea of a high school producing a stage musical featuring "call girls" was a bit touchy in 1972), despite the fact that some of the students in our cast were already dancing professionally as showgirls on the Las Vegas Strip.

To me, very little of today's Hollywood studio output (regardless of MPAA rating) has much business in a high school classroom. Today's "project development" process pretty much removes any literary merit that might otherwise have served as basis for academic discussion.

[ 10-30-2005, 01:21 AM: Message edited by: Paul Mayer ]
 

---

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 12-22-2004, 12:47 PM:
 
We had in 16mm for english classes Julious Ceasar Romeo & JUlliet Becket Lord of the flies Inherit the Wind To Kill a Mockingbird
and for history class The Warlord The Lion in Winter Charge of the Light Brigade THe Man whowould be king and Battle of Britain
They were always shown in one sitting in the school auditorium on a pair of Bell & Howell Marc300 machine the scope image was about 28' if memory serves
 

---

Posted by Mark Hajducki (Member # 1732) on 12-22-2004, 12:59 PM:
 

quote: Thomas Procyk

---

I remember watching 16mm in science class

---

The only time I remember seeing film used in an academic context was in a 2001 university class a 'homemade' peice of timelapse 16mm film of the clouds outside the tutorial room. The footage could have done with some filmguard. This footage did not have any objectional content and the only entertaining element was seeing one of the goodyear baloons flying round at high speed.
 

---

Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 12-22-2004, 01:56 PM:
 
There was a teacher at a local high school that almost got fired back around October for showing Farenheit 9/11 to his government class (all seniors).

When the parents found out, it was taken to the school board and the teacher got in a lot of trouble for showing an R rated movie without consent of the parents.

I wonder what the REAL motivation of getting the teacher in trouble was. Was it the fact that the film is rated R, or maybe it was that Knox County ended up voting 76% republican in the last election and a few right wing parents did not like the political message their kids were seeing...
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-22-2004, 02:37 PM:
 
How about showing the buggery scene from Pulp Fiction in a sex education class?

Might reduce the teenage pregnancy rates a bit...
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 12-22-2004, 03:30 PM:
 
When I worked in schools film was much used. Almost everything was 16mm, I seem to remember that a 35mm portable machine was hired in a couple of times. Most of it was 'educational' stuff, anything from 400 to 2000 feet, and we would typcally have about 50 prints in from the film library each week. Feature flms were run once each week for the film club, plus the odd one for class use, typically films of English Literature exam set books.

Some teachers ran film themselves, some preferred us (technicians) to do it. Many of the prints were in a really terrible state, some should have been scrapped about thirty years previously. Every foot of film was inspected as it came in.

We also had a few 8mm film loop cartridge projectors; anyone remember those? The original ones were Technicolor, the later ones THD. Super-8 ones were still available new, but standard 8 ones had been out of production for many years, and our science department had a lot of standard 8 loops. It took a lot of canibalisation and engineering work to keep the old Technicolor standard 8 machines running.

Leo, there was one film that we used to show that would have served that purpose quite well. It showed various fairly revolting aspects of pregnancy and birth, including a birth which went wrong. This thing used to turn up each year, and I just couldn't watch it. I won't go into detail of what it showed, but there was lots of blood involved; the baby came close to death. Quite early on just about all of the boys in the class would have turned strange colours and left the room, and few of the girls, who seemed somewhat stronger-stomached about such things managed to last until the end.

What purpose showimg this to anybody other than a student midwife or obstetrician was supposed to serve, I cannot imagine. After a few years the education authority, who ran the film library where most of our prints came from, withdrew the film from general circulation, and would only allow it to be shown under special circumstances, by prior agreement. What sort of 'special circumstances' would have been considered suitable I don't know, but at least it meant that we never got the film again.

For some reason the really revolting biological films always seemed to be shown just before lunch! I remember there was one on dissecting earthworms, and another on inspecting animal carcasses in an abattoir, and how to identify unfit meat. No doubt very useful if you are training to be a meat inspector, but what use to the average London school child?
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-22-2004, 04:23 PM:
 
We have a fair few 16mm educational films in our collection, and when we show them (or, more usually, edited clips from them) at screenings in cinemas and community venues across the region they never fail to bring back memories. The Newcastle-based production company Turners did quite a bit in that market (it operated from 1945-96) and we now hold their collection. My favourite is a 10-minute short from 1953 entitled 'That Time of the Month' (need I explain more?). In one shot, our teenage schoolgirl walks out of the school gate looking somewhat flushed, while a matronly commentator explains in a voiceover that 'Lucinda felt a bit grotty after break this morning. Not to worry - that's perfectly normal. After a relaxing afternoon tucked up in bed with her hot water bottle, she'll feel as right as rain!'

The wonderful thing about this clip is that younger viewers laugh out loud at the (unintentional) double entendre, while their parents and grandparents can just take it in as nostalgia, so you don't have to worry about a bad reaction from anyone.

Among the more grisly educational films we have is a print of The Smoking Machine from 1966. It dates from the first wave of anti-smoking propaganda released by the Central Office of Information. Such was the importance of this campaign that the Documentary Movement veteran J.B. Holmes (of Coastal Command fame) was hauled out of retirement to supervise the production. The film consists mainly of shots of a transparent plastic anatomical model of the respiratory system. The viewer is shown tar from a cigarette being ingested and then settling in the lungs, with the predictable intended audience reaction. After I showed it to a friend, her reaction was 'That was gross! Now I need a fag to get over that.'

Other shock tactic films include I'm Train Trained from 1977, which emphasises the indavisability of playing near railway lines (especially electrified ones) and Play Safe (1981) which delivers a similar message in respect of electricity substations. Both are based on fictional stories in which children are killed, and were intended to be shown to kids in the 7-10 age range.

I could also go on about nuclear civil defence training films from the '50s and '60s, but it's getting towards bedtime (hot water bottles and all)...
 

---

Posted by David Yauch (Member # 2754) on 12-22-2004, 06:21 PM:
 
Personally I don't think there is ANYTHING wrong with parents not wanting their kids to watch rated 'r' movies. And if the motion picture industry is wanting someone to be 17 before seeing certain films w/out a parent, then the schools should be the first to set that as a MINIMUM.

You don't need to show a kid nudity to teach them ANYTHING, except what a naked human body looks like. And you don't need to show them farenheit 9/11, unless you want them to see the true meaning of the word 'obnoxious.'

I'm glad your sticking up for the teacher who showed F911 Mike. Good to know it's ok to show a rated r movie as long as there is some political bias behind it, we wouldn't want to censor anyone or squash their freedoms right?

Give the parents the choice unless the kid is 18+.
 

---

Posted by Mike Williams (Member # 1140) on 12-22-2004, 09:07 PM:
 
It is the context it is presented in David. While you may be right about F911 being a tad obnoxious, it may be more appropriate for a government class than any other.

I am sure there are some equally obnoxious movies that are slanted the other way. To be fair, the teacher should have shown those as well to contrast in my opinion.

My point is that it seemed that the R rating was being used as an excuse to crucify the teacher because the parents did not agree with the fact that the R rated movie was F911.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-22-2004, 10:18 PM:
 
We had the "Technicolor" film-loop machines in my elementary school, both the regular-8 and super-8 versions (this was in the early 1980s). The cartridges were cleverly designed so that a regular-8 cartridge would not physically fit into a super-8 projector (and vice versa). The regular-8 model could run at either 18fps or 24fps (neither could reproduce sound). The machines were designed to project onto a small screen (maybe 3-4' wide at most) and were not bright enough to use to show a film to an entire class. Supposedly, there is a 16mm version of the film-loop machine, but I've never seen one.

We also had 16mm, of course--B&H 545T auto-shredders and, by the late 1980s, Eiki and Elmo slot-load machines.

As for showing "R"-rated films in class, I don't necessarily have a problem with it, provided that a) the film in question has educational value, and that b) the teacher believes that it is appropriate for the age and maturity level of the students in a given class. In other words, the decision to show or not show a film should be made in the same way that teachers decide to use or not use books and other materials in classes. I'm very strongly opposed to the idea books or films or other materials which have educational value should be banned from use in public schools. The MPAA ratings system is intended to provide a general guideline to parents, and shouldn't be used as an excuse to censor materials.
 

---

Posted by David Yauch (Member # 2754) on 12-22-2004, 10:52 PM:
 
Mike I see your point, but I still can't see why the rated 'r' movie is necessary. And if there is a circumstance in which a teacher feels a rated r movie teaches something in the best way possible, then why can't they get parental appoval first?

Down here it was always that PG or higher had to have approval. It wasn't a big deal, the teachers would usually just send a list of all the movies they MIGHT play throughout the year home with the student at the beginning and they would get it signed. All is well.

They changed it a couple years back so that any movie may be shown, but the student has the right to opt out. NO prior announcement is required, and the alternative is usually several pages of bookwork. This is in the middle of a community with a very large LDS population, you wouldn't believe the backlash. Talk about some pissed off parents...
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 12-23-2004, 02:34 AM:
 
Scott, The Super-8 loop cartridges we had were blue plastic, whereas the standard 8 ones were colourless, I might have got that the wrong way round, it's been many years now. The use of the things declined in later years, but they were still much used in the late '70s, mainly science subjects. We were always having loops in for repair. They also used to scratch film, we tried various lubricants on them, but without much success; there wasn't any Film-Guard in those days.

Technicolor did make a sound loop projector, I saw it demonstrated at an exhibition, and it was listed in catalogues for a while, but I don't know anybody who actually bought one. It was much larger, ran up to 400 feet of film, Super-8 only, and could play optical and magnetic tracks. Given the problems with the 50 foot cartridges, I wouldn't even want to try it with 400 feet. The one I saw demonstrated jammed at least once while I was watching it.

I never saw a 16mm machine of similar design, but Elf made a loop attachment for conventional 16mm projectors, it was a sort of flat, platter type thing, about the size of a 1200 foot spool, I think it fed from the centre, unlike the Technicolor cartridges. It wasn't like the star-shaped 35mm endless loop systems, the film was in a normal circular roll, so it must have been loosely wound, and slid over itself as it moved through the roll.

We also had, but never used, a thing called a loop absorber, which was a metal bar, about 1.5 metres long, which attached to the spool spindles of a projector. Attached to this, and able to be adjusted along its length were two metal rods, pointing upwards, with about six closly spaced rollers along them. There were a couple of other rollers to guide the film to and from the projector. This thing would take up to about 16 or 20 metres of film. I think it would have been a real pain to set up without dropping the film in the process. More useful for continuous running than easy loading; exhibition stands or shop window displays maybe. At least, unlike the Technicolor and ELF systems the film didn't have to slide over itself, so it shouldn't have had the problem with scratching.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 12-23-2004, 03:31 AM:
 

quote: Mike Williams

---

I am sure there are some equally obnoxious movies that are slanted the other way. To be fair, the teacher should have shown those as well to contrast in my opinion.

---

quote:

---

For cripe's sake! These people make it sound like they were showing PORNO FLIX in the classroom!

---

quote: Carl Martin

---

i had a teacher who showed porn to his students

---

quote:

---

How about showing the buggery scene from Pulp Fiction in a sex education class? [evil]

Might reduce the teenage pregnancy rates a bit...

---

You can get pregnant from buggery????
 

---

Posted by Barry Martin (Member # 1376) on 12-24-2004, 10:07 AM:
 
Only films I remember seeing in school were Medicine Man (some middle-school science/biology class, maybe 7th grade?) I think the teacher showed that to relate the importance of the destruction of the rain forests to us (better choice than Fern Gully, although I loved that movie as a kid ) and the older version of Romeo & Juliet for a high school english class. I don't recall permission slips for that, and I believe you get to see Juliet topless after she and Romeo I remember everyone laughing when they saw Juliet's chest, must have been a joke about size or something.

Overall, I think that films can be used in certain circumstances to punctuate a lesson, but never in place of one. Rated R or not, when you drop your kids to school you are entrusting the school and its faculty to educate your kids the way they see fit. There are plenty of communities where there are more than one school and you have the choice. Most parents don't even research them and decide on a school, they just choose the closest so they can sleep a bit later and not worry about a longer drive. If you have a problem with a curriculum or school's choices, discuss it with the teacher, then principal, then superintendent, etc.

Still wondering what educational value Tin Cup offered......
 

---