 Click on CAPCon Alert image for explanation |
A service to His little ones (which includes at-home teens) through you, their parents and grandparents, in His name by His Word MAR23037  (2003), RAnalysis Date: April 4, 2003 CAP Score: 13 out of 100 CAP Influence Density: 5.68 MinMax: -76 |
 Give your visitors clear access to ALL CAP movie analyses. Put the link above on your web page. FREE! Click it to test it and to see what you will get! |
 NO service charges. All donations are tax deductible. |
To subscribe to (or unsubscribe from) our FREE text-only versions of our Entertainment Media Analysis Reports as they are calculated, visit our Mailman. If you experience difficulty with Mailman, send us your request. Your email address will NOT be given or sold to other parties. |
 (2003), R -- Maybe it was fair not to expect such vulgarity.... Cast/Crew Details Courtesy Internet Movie Database Production (US): Avery Pix, Newman/Tooley Films Distribution (US): New Line Cinema Director(s): F. Gary Gray Producer(s): Robert John Degus, Vin Diesel, F. Gary Gray, Vincent Newman, Joey Nittolo, Tucker Tooley, George Zakk Written by/Screenplay: Christian Gudegast, Paul Scheuring (written by) Cinematography/Camera: Jack N. Green Music: Dr. Dre (songs), Anne Dudley Film Editing: Robert Brown, Sean Hubbert Casting: Janet Hirshenson, Jane Jenkins Production Design: Ida Random Art Direction: Tom Reta Viewed At: Loews Cineplex Cityview, Fort Worth, Texas Granted, this was a R-rated movie, but really! I wonder if the parents with the preteen son and three or four year old daughter, the mother with the three or four year old daughter and others with underage kids in the audience had known what was in this film, whether they would have attended. With their kids, anyway. I guess they did not expect this movie to assault their kids' senses and character development with 87 uses of the most foul of the foul words [Col. 3:8], with 45 uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary [Cor. 8:7], with 27 murders, with full female nudity repeatedly [**], with ....... Maybe it was fair not to expect such vulgarity from a movie with Vin Diesel's name attached to it since he recently starred in two action-packed PG-13 movies, Fast and Furious and xXx, each with a lot fewer assaults on morality than A Man Apart. Who would have expected the same guy to appear in such a vulgar film as this one. If they had read this analysis report before they went, they would have been able to make an informed decision without having to see it first. But then, who am I to watch these filthy shows? If that is a question on your mind I ask then who was the Apostle Paul to walk through the extremes of sin in Corinth to deliver the Gospel news? And I then ask who were the watchmen in Ezekiel [Ezek 33:2 - 9]? I am your servant in Jesus' name. I serve you as one of His watchmen, alerting you of the coming enemy ... the enemy of wholesome morals and of His Word that warns of teaching and/or causing our youth to sin [Luke 17:2, 1 Cor. 15:33). What you do with that information is your decision. Am I to chose by my own understanding the enemies of which I am to alert you? Am I to select only those which I think are offensive? Did Apostle Paul select which of the sins in Corinth he would address as he took the Gospel to the masses? Neither will I pick-n-choose. And who am I to tell you such programming is sinful? Of myself I am no one. But His Word is clear. I just share His Word with you by applying it to the behaviors noted in films So you will know. And all the cinematic cyanide is a shame if only because Vin Diesel is good. He has always portrayed brutal, snarling, vindictive and surly parts, but he is good at what he does. This time, Diesel is not the social antagonist of xXx or Fast and Furious, but is Sean Vetter, a Los Angeles ex-street punk turned DEA. With Ty Frost (Steve Eastin) at the helm, Vetter leads the best anti-narcotic unit the DEA has ever had. His tactics and techniques are unconventional and push the legal limits, but he gets the job done. Typically in an unorthodox way ... with a large body count. This job is to take rich man Guillermo "Memo" Lucero (Geno Silva), rich by crime [Hab. 2:12, Hab. 2:9], out of business. Out of the drug business. Memo is the drug lord of the Baja Cartel, a particularly nasty drug regime of Mexico. Soon into the story, Vetter does precisely that by dragging him out of a strip joint while a nude dancer slithers all over Memo. While Memo is in prison, Vetter encounters a second nemesis that goes by the name of Diablo who is trying to take over Memo's territory with Hollywood Jack Slayton (Timothy Olyphant) in local control. Diablo remains unseen and unidentified throughout the show. All we "see" of Diablo is his partner who is also without a name but played by Santiago Verdu. A perverse relationship develops between Memo and Vetter. Memo can help Vetter nail the Diablo punks that killed Vetter's wife, Stacy (Jacqueline Obradors) and tried to kill him. But to do that, Memo must be transferred out of the prison he is in since he is not safe there. (Boo-hoo.) But because of the body count, both sides, left in the trail of Vetter's war with Memo, Frost takes Vetter's badge. However he does it, Vetter gets Memo transferred. But now "a man apart" without a badge ... and without legal restraint ... Vetter launches his own war against Diablo. And the body count rises. Vetter intimidates and coerces his DEA partner, Demetrius Hicks (Larenz Tate) to help him. A married man not wanting to take such chances, Hicks tries his best to convince Vetter to back off and let the force take care of things. But Vetter has a "mission" ... to get the bad guys who killed his wife. And if justice is served in the process, fine. Hicks breaks down to Vetter's pleas and joins Vetter in his vendetta against the slimes. But is Vetter any better than the slimes? An engaging plot with somewhat quality performances. Each performer seemed comfortable with their roles and cardboard performances were few to none. The glances at the camera or the director by performers as their scene or monologue ended were absent as far as I could tell. But what they performed is the problem. There is a thread of caustic craziness in the last three fourths of the show. Brutality is unequaled in any of Diesel's other performances I have noted. Michael Wilmington of the Chicago Tribune sums it up quite well: "I began to feel that life was garbage, people were garbage and movies were garbage as well." More evidence of that which I am fighting: that the movie made Michael feel ... Quite descriptive of the influence of modern entertainment, wouldn't you say? In addition to the saturation of the movie with foul language and freckling with sexual immorality, the presence drinking, smoking and illegal drugs were prominent. Let me share with you a summary of a report prepared by the American College of Physicians regarding the presence of smoking and drinking influences in and as entertainment. Though the study centers around tobacco and alcohol, I imagine the influence is the same regrading illegal drugs since, to youth, they, too, are controlled substances.
Sure, you can talk to your kids about such evils, but typically comes the day in every child's life when your words become nothing more than that -- words. Fill your kids with such aberrant behaviors in and as entertainment and what do you expect? Garbage in - Garbage out [1 Cor. 15:33, with tangency to Luke 17:2]. There are many other issues of assault on morality and decency in A Man Apart and they are itemized in the listing in the Findings/Scoring section. SCRIPTURAL APPLICATION(S) If needed to focus or fortify, applicable text is underlined or bracketed [ ]. If you wish to have full context available, the Blue Letter Bible is a convenient source. If you use the Blue Letter Bible, a new window will open. Close it to return here or use "Window" in your browser's menu bar to alternate between the CAP page and the Blue Letter Bible page. ***Selected Scriptures of Armour against the influence of the entertainment industry*** As always, it is best to refer to the Findings/Scoring section -- the heart of the CAP analysis model -- for the most complete assessment possible of this movie. |
 Wanton Violence/Crime (W) Impudence/Hate (I) Sex/Homosexuality (S) Drugs/Alcohol (D): Offense to God (O) Murder/Suicide (M) |
 NO service charges!!! Donations to the CAP Ministry are Tax Deductible!!! |
 |
 |
 |
 Christian Media News |
 |
 A Singles Christian Network |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| NOTE: While the Summary/Commentary section of these reports is precisely that -- a summary in commentary format which can be and sometimes is subjective, the actual CAP Analysis Model (the Findings/Scoring section) makes no scoring allowances for trumped-up "messages" to excuse, for manufacture of justification for, or camouflaging of ignominious content or aberrant behavior or imagery with "redeeming" programming. Disguising sinful behavior in a theme/plot does not excuse the sinful behavior of either the one who is drawing pleasure or example of behavior or thought from the sinful display or of the practitioners demonstrating the sinful behavior. We make no attempt to quantify the "artistic" or "entertainment" value of a movie -- whether a movie has any positive value or "entertainment" value is up to mom/dad. The CAP analysis model is the only known set of tools available to parents and grandparents which give *them* the control they need, bypassing the opinion-based assessment of movies by others and defeating the deceit of those who would say anything to convince their parents otherwise. The model is completely objective to His Word. Our investigation standards are founded in the teachings and expectations of Jesus Christ. If a sinful behavior is portrayed, it is called sinful whether Hollywood tries to make it otherwise. That the sinful behavior is "justified" by some manufactured conditions does not soften nor erase the price of sin. Whether there is application of fantasy "justification" or "redemption" is up to mom/dad. |
| "There are some in the entertainment industry who maintain that 1) violent programming is harmless because no studies exist that prove a connection between violent entertainment and aggressive behavior in children, and 2) young people know that television, movies, and video games are simply fantasy. Unfortunately, they are wrong on both accounts." And "Viewing violence may lead to real life violence." I applaud these associations for fortifying 1 Cor. 15:33. Read the rest of the story. From our more than eight years of study, I contend that other aberrant behaviors, attitudes, and expressions can be inserted in place of "violence" in that statement. Our Director - Child Psychology Support, a licensed psychologist and certified school psychologist concurs. For example, "Viewing arrogance against fair authority may lead to your kids defying you in real life." Or "Viewing sex may lead to sex in real life." Likewise and especially with impudence, hate and foul language. I further contend that any positive behavior can be inserted in place of "violence" with the same chance or likelihood of being a behavior template for the observer; of being incorporated into the behavior mechanics and/or coping skills of the observer. In choosing your entertainment, please consider carefully the "rest of the story" and our findings. |
