RED does not mean "stop." GREEN does not mean "go." Click on the CAPCon Alert image for explanation
CAP Movie Ministry
A ministry of the ChildCare Action Project:
Christian Analysis of American Culture (CAP Ministry)
A 501(c)(3) Nonprofit Christian Ministry.
Entertainment Media Analysis Report
A service to His little ones through you in His name by His Word

with Hannibal Rising vs Norbit comparative.
(2007), PG-13 [HARDCORE R-13*] (1hr 36min)

Analysis Date
CAP Final Score
CAP Influence Density
February 9, 2007
24 out of 100

The #1 Christian entertainment media analysis service on the Internet. We give you OBJECTIVE tools NO ONE ELSE CAN to help YOU make an informed decision for yourself whether a film is fit for your family. Over 1100 analyses for parents, grandparents, pastors, youth leaders and more.
Give your visitors full access to over 1100 CAP movie analyses! Place this image on your website and link it to

Click it to try it!

PLEASE . . . . . . .

Through PayPal

(a PayPal account is NOT required)
OR (preferred) by Check or Money Order.
The CAP is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit Christian ministry (75-2607488). Donations to us are TAX-DEDUCTIBLE

Stay informed ...OBJECTIVELY...
on what Hollywood feeds your kids. SUBSCRIBE
(or unsubscribe)
to our FREE text-only email version of these reports and our COMING SOON notices.
Email this report to friends and
tell them about the CAP Ministry:

Christian Long Distance

(While the Scriptural references are certainly not subjective, my commentary may be and sometimes is somewhat subjective.)

If Scriptural references appear, the full text appears at the end of the Summary / Commentary.


(2007), PG-13 [HARDCORE R-13*] -- Hannibal Rising [R] earned a higher score.

Cast/Crew Details Courtesy Internet Movie Database
Production (US): Davis Entertainment, Tollin/Robbins Productions
Distribution (US): DreamWorks SKG, Paramount Pictures
Director(s): Brian Robbins
Producer(s): John Davis, Eddie Murphy, Michael Tollin
Screenplay by: Jay Scherick, David Ronn
Story: Eddie Murphy, Charles Q. Murphy
Cinematography/Camera: J. Clark Mathis
Music: David Newman
Film Editing: Ned Bastille
Casting: Juel Bestrop, Seth Yanklewitz
Production Design: Clay A. Griffith
Viewed At: Driftwood Theater 6

NOTE: From here to UPDATE after the next blue divider bar below is for the original partial viewing of 23 minutes. It is no longer applicable but is left here for archive and convenience purposes.

I am not going to dignify this piece of cinematic cyanide with a Summary/Commentary about it other than Eddie Murphy stars as three of the main characters; Norbit, Rasputia and Mr. Wong. While the skills and talents of Murphy and the costume people are outstanding, let the Findings/Scoring section speak for the content. Just envision 34 uses of profanity and 37 examples of sexually immoral behavior/imagery in 23 minutes and you'll get the ... er ... picture.

This is an analysis of a partial viewing. (SEE UPDATE BELOW) The scoring indicated is for the first 23 minutes of the show. The first 23 minutes are most certainly R-equivalent. The portion viewed ended with the puppet show spewing profanity at a stage audience of children. And I will not argue the merits of the CAP analysis model for analysis of partial viewings. It is as accurate and complete for the portion viewed as it would be for the full length of the show.

I may at a later date/time return to complete the viewing since Norbit  is a leading demon for stealing childhood from children. If you don't believe that, consider this: about 80% of the audience on opening night didn't even come up to my shoulders.

UPDATE: Above I said I might go back and set through a complete viewing of Norbit. It is done. (Plese be sure to note the SIDEBAR NOTE at the end of this Summary/Commentary.)

Some have griped about the few partial viewing analyses we have prepared, claiming that unless a film is watched in its entirety a "review" of it is not possible. Maybe this report will help them understand that 1) CAP analyses are not "reviews" and 2) the CAP analysis model is as functional and accurate for a portion viewed as it is for an entire film.

To demonstrate this, the analysis of Norbit, a particularly nasty moral rape of our children, is fractionated into four separate segments, each segment representing a specific fraction of the film.

As shown in the following comparative data display, the segment in the upper left corner of the display is the data from the analysis of the partial viewing of only 23 minutes posted here originally. The second segment in the upper right corner of the display is the data from the analysis of the next 26 minutes (24 to 49 minutes inclusive). The third segment in the lower left corner is for the next 25 minutes (50 to 74 minutes). The last segment in the lower right corner is for the final 22 minutes (75 to 96 minutes). Fractionation into precisely equal parts was not possible while still being able to pay attention to annotating the findings at the incredible rate this film required.

R-rated movies in the comparative baseline database earned final scores of 54 or below out of 100. Each segment score for the PG-13 Norbit  is less than 54. Much less than 54. It should now be obvious that Norbit  is R-13 through and through. "R-13" means programming rated PG-13 by the MPAA which earns a CAP score that falls in the range of scores earned by R-rated programing. See our R-13 finding for more information about "R-13." Even if each of the second, third and fourth film segments were equivalent to G-rated programming the film should be considered R-equivalent because the first 23-minute segment is equivalent to R-rated programming.

Note that both the Impudence/Hate and Sexual Immorality investigation areas in each of the four segments found content earning a score of zero out of 100. The zero scores in Impudence/Hate are due almost entirely to 120 uses of profanity: 34 in the first 23 minutes, 34 in the next 26 minutes, 33 in the next 25 minutes and 19 in the last 22 minutes. As a side note, even the nearly uniform distribution of profanity throughout the 96-minute film suggests saturation.

Also suggesting saturation are the zero scores in Sexual Immorality due to finding 70 instances of some form of sexually immoral behavior or imagery spread also rather evenly over the course of the 96-minute film. Likewise the film content found by the Offense to God investigation area earned a score of zero in each of the four segments. Wanton Violence/Crime doesn't have a much better tale to tell but at least earned above-zero scores in two of the four analysis segments.

The six investigation areas found ignominy throughout the film at the rate of 167 examples per hour. That is 2.8 per minute. The only morally positive thing to say about Norbit is that there were no murders or suicides found at all.

For the statisticians, mathematicians and other technically minded folks: The reason the average of the four segment scores does not equal the final score for the full viewing is that the score in an investigation area shown as zero may actually be much less than zero. We use display limiters to display as zero all less-than-zero scores since less-than-zero scores are meaningless to the user. This is the case, for example, with the Wanton Violence/Crime segment scores, two of which are greater than zero. The actual Wanton Violence/Crime score for the first segment is -117 and for the fourth segment is -152, thus mathematically annihilating the 62 in the second segment and the 47 in the third resulting in an average of -40 which, as designed, is displayed as zero.

Imagine a set of six vertical uniformly graduated scales each from 100 at the top representing solid wholesome morality and -500 at the bottom representing unprecedented vile and putrescent morality the likes of which has never been seen. The CAP analysis model may be thought of as a window with visibility only at the top sixth of the scales (100 to zero). Though we will not do so we could lower our investigation standards and enlarge that visibility window downward a piece and, e.g., make -100 the zero reference or even -200. That is, in essence, what society has been doing ... lowering our threshold of acceptability by enlarging the "window of acceptability" to include much more debase and vulgar behaviors. A more revealing perspective is that society has maybe not enlarged the window of acceptability to include more immorality but instead has moved the fixed-sized visibility window from the top of the morality scales downward to capture more immorality as acceptable and in doing so has slid the previously wholesome morality out of sight into obscurity. This downward movement of morality leading to a state of obscurity of some of the wholesome standards and behaviors (moral relativity and convenience absolution of guilt) is what moved me to write "Progressively we have become so drugged by the narcotics of extremes of immorality in and as entertainment that what once was morally acceptable has become morally invisible." And if we as a society keep going as we have been, that window of acceptability may move even lower to make -300 or -400 the zero reference. Minus 500? The likes of which has never been seen?

This description also shows how the CAP analysis model reveals the relative position and movement of morality in media (e.g., our R-13 finding). At the rate of decay of wholesome moral standards in and as entertainment/communications since about 1955, it won't be long until that -500 becomes the popular zero reference. Rest assured, -500 will never become the zero reference for the CAP analysis model. The CAP analysis model is built on God's Word and, like His Word, never changes. The 100 and zero will stay where they are for as long as His Word remains the same.


I just completed crunching the numbers for Hannibal Rising  and wanted to share some facts with you about it as related to Norbit.

There are two reasons I decided to conduct analysis of Hannibal Rising. 1) to maintain mathematical integrity of our R-13 finding -- a claim of a PG-13 film being equivalent to R-rated programming cannot be made without empirical evidence possible only by tolerating a few R films. And 2) to do an analysis of a "hardcore" R film chronologically adjacent to Norbit  as a comparison. Guess what? Hannibal Rising  earned a higher final score than Norbit. Norbit  is rated PG-13. Hannibal Rising  is rated R. To help drive this point home, see the comparative Norbit/Hannibal data display below.

Even the Influence Density of Hannibal Rising is about one half as severe as that of Norbit.  A sign of the times. Our analysis of Hannibal Rising will be online soon.

Norbit  is a perfect example of the CAP Rule of 1000 which states a movie which presents, for example, 100 examples of bad behaviors/images of lesser severity, each worth only 10 "bads" (Movie A) is just as negatively influential as a movie of the same length that presents only 10 examples of bad behaviors/images but of more extreme severity each worth 100 "bads" (Movie B). Each movie is worth 1000 "bads."' Indeed, many "lesser" bad influences can have more  of an influence on our young than fewer more bold and extreme influences. Please remember also that a bad influence does not have to be real to influence badly.

This project was equivalent to five individual analyses. I hope it proves the merits of the CAP analysis model to the skeptic who says that analysis of anything less than the entire film is useless. Note that this effort was far too expensive to ever be repeated without financial support.


If needed to focus or fortify, applicable text is underlined or bracketed [ ] or bold. 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.


The list of verses applicable to the behaviors in this partial viewing would extent beyond the bottom of your screen. Let the Selected Scriptures below suffice, especially Psalm 12:8.

***Selected Scriptures of Armour against the influence of the entertainment industry***
  • Ps. 12:8 The wicked freely strut about [e.g., create progressively vile/offensive entertainment with impunity and no consequences and present it to younger and younger audiences every year] when what is vile is honored among men [when enough people continue to defend it, embrace it, pay for it, enjoy it, want it, submit to it. I call attention to Ps. 12:8 to warn of the creeping desensitizing power of "entertainment."]
  • Col. 2:8 Beware lest any man [by his influence] spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ.
  • 1 Cor. 15:33 Be not deceived: evil [kakov: of a bad nature, not such as it ought to be] communications corrupt good manners.
  • Rom. 5:19 For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous.
  • Jude 1:4 For there are certain men* crept in unawares [secretly slipped in among us], who were before of old ordained to this condemnation [whose condemnation was written about long ago], ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness [a license for immorality], and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ. [*men: anthropos {anth'-ro-pos}, generic, a human being, whether male or female]
  • Matt. 25:40 And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these my brethren, ye have done it unto me.
  • Luke 17:2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones. [Offend: skandalizo {skan-dal-id'-zo} - scandalize; to entice to sin; to cause a person to begin to distrust and desert one whom he ought to trust and obey; to cause to fall away.]
  • Ps. 119:133 Order my steps in thy word: and let not any iniquity have dominion over me [let no sin rule over me].
  • John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.
  • 1 Thess. 5:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil. ["Evil" includes all things that are sinful.]


    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.
    (The objective heart of the CAP Analysis Model, independent of and insulated from the Summary / Commentary section.)

    Norbit (2007) CAP Thermometers

    Wanton Violence/Crime (W)
  • throwing a baby out the window of a moving car
  • beheading of a pet duck as meanness to a young boy then giving the head to him to play with
  • throwing a harpoon through a board carried by children
  • playground beating
  • strongarm beatings to intimidate for money
  • slap/hit
  • threats, including to kill, repeatedly
  • assaults, repeatedly
  • threat to kill child
  • extortion and fraud
  • vehicle wreck
  • action violence
  • fighting with implements
  • impalement with harpoon

    Impudence/Hate (I)
  • 120 uses of the three/four letter word vocabulary, five times by or before children
  • lies, repeatedly
  • flatulence

    Sexual Immorality (S)
  • toilet humor, repeatedly
  • crude humor such as talking about mouth on posterior, body exudates, repeatedly
  • inappropriate touch by and of adolescents
  • open mouth kiss
  • excessive cleavage and/or chest exposure, repeatedly
  • vulgar humor such as about anatomy, intercourse, repeatedly
  • motions of oral sex (clothed)
  • sex invitation
  • motions of intercourse (clothed)
  • woman jumping on man into bed for sex, repeatedly
  • self touching, repeatedly
  • pimps/pimping, repeatedly
  • painting nudity
  • below navel skin threatening exposure of that which follows
  • full rear male nudity
  • ghosting of female anatomy though clothing, repeatedly
  • loud man and woman in bed together for sex
  • woman jumping on man for sex, repeatedly
  • rude gaze, repeatedly
  • portrayal of arousal
  • admission of out-of-wedlock children by immoral sex
  • prostitution
  • female side nudity
  • adult in underwear, repeatedly
  • homosexual and/or lesbian reference, repeatedly
  • tongue kissing
  • vulgar dance

    Drugs/Alcohol (D):
  • booze, repeatedly
  • drinking, repeatedly
  • smoking, repeatedly

    Offense to God (O)
  • ten uses of God's name in vain with the four letter expletive and eight without it
  • adultery, repeatedly
  • mocking Scriptures/faith, repeatedly
  • "Fool!"

    Murder/Suicide (M)
  • none noted

  • Christian Educators Association International



    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.

    Join Christian Banner Exchange Network Today!

    The ChildCare Action Project (CAP) is a nonprofit Christian ministry. We rely on public support. If you wish to contribute to the CAP, please send your donations to
    ChildCare Action Project
    Post Office Box 177
    Granbury, TX 76048-0177

    Your gifts are tax deductible in accordance with Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Service Tax Codes. Please feel free to write to us.

    You are welcome to go to the
    CAP Reports page
    or go to the
    Top of the CAP Home Page
    or the
    CAP Site Map (Table of Contents)
    or leave me an email message or comment at

    In the name of Jesus:
    Thank you for visiting us and may God bless you. Prayerfully, we will provide you with some of the most revealing commentary and investigative reporting you have ever read.

    Lord, Master, Teacher, Savior, God.
    Tom Carder
    ChildCare Action Project (CAP): Christian Analysis of American Culture
    100% dependent on your tax-deductible financial support

    Copyright ChildCare Action Project (CAP) Ministry

    Since December 5, 2000

    Christian Long Distance
    The Fundamental Top 500

    We exist only by your tax-deductible donations. PLEASE

    Features PayPal! You do NOT need an account to donate.

    Copyright ChildCare Action Project (CAP) Ministry
    A Nonprofit Christian Ministry EIN: 75-2607488