Click on CAPCon Alert
image for explanation
A service to our youth through you,
their parents and grandparents, in His name by His Word
Possession (2002), PG-13
Analysis Date: August 20, 2002
CAP Score: 58
CAP Influence Density: 0.99
|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.|
POSSESSION (PG-13) -- Even rulers and kings of long ago knew that the way to change a culture is to change the kids.
Production: Baltimore Spring Creek Productions, Contagious Films, USA Films, Warner Bros
Distribution: USA Films
Director(s): Neil LaBute
Producer(s): Len Amato, David Barron (I), Barry Levinson, Stephen Pevner, Guy Tannahill, Paula Weinstein
Written by/Screenplay: Novel: A.S. Byatt. Screenplay: David Henry Hwang, Laura Jones, Neil LaBute
Cinematography/Camera: Jean-Yves Escoffier
Music: Gabriel Yared
Film Editing: Claire Simpson
Casting: Mary Selway
Production Design: Luciana Arrighi
Art Direction: Susan Whitaker
With a CAP Final Score of 58 Possession is a true PG-13 in accordance with the comparative baseline database scoring range for PG-13 movies (55 to 67 out of 100), but it is equivalent to R-rated programming in Sex/Homosexuality, in this case, Sex/Lesbianism [Rom. 1:26]. Most of it is talk, but there is heterosexual intercourse in this PG-13 [1 Cor. 7:1-2]. The private areas are covered but there is no debate possible with the positioning of the actor/actress pair and by the way they were ... uh ... weren't dressed. Yes, this is bold talk in a Christian service but here you only read it. If your 13 year olds go to this movie they will not only see it, they will hear it and much smooth talk and fine-sounding arguments to excuse it [Jude 4, Col. 2:4, Rom. 16:17 - 18]. There is also a suicide by a lesbian partner. Possession is, however, an intricate piece of work in terms of digging up facts about an historical figure. And I mean digging up. Literally. When one goes digging one ends up with dirt. And this movie has its share of it.
Roland Michell (Aaron Eckhart - that's him in the upper right corner of the boxart) is on a quest in London to investigate the background of his favorite poet, Queen Victoria's own pillar of morality, Randolph Henry Ash (Jeremy Northam - lower right corner of the boxart), master at written love and model of marital fidelity. Michell stumbles upon, rather, steals from a British library two sheets of writing in Ash's own hand which seem to provide information of less-than-honorable antics of Ash: that the one thought of previously as the model of morality was indeed an adulterer of the Victorian period with feminist and lesbian Christabel LaMotte (Jennifer Ehle - the lower right coner of the boxart with Ash/Northam) with whom we later discover Ash fathered a daughter. It is around this time in the show that LaMotte's lesbian partner, Blanche Glover (Lena Headey - not pictured) commits suicide. Twice. Only in the movies. Glover sews rocks in the hem of her dress then walks into a lake or pond. The second of the "twice" is a replay of the event. For effect, of course [Exod. 20:13].
The apparent scandalous association between Ash and LaMotte led Michell to enlist the aid of the undisputed modern authority on LaMotte, Maude Bailey (Gwyneth Paltrow - upper left corner of the boxart) to further investigate the finding. And as evidence of intimacy between Ash and LaMotte rises so does the intimacy between Michell and Bailey. That "nothing happened" does not change the fact that they ended up in bed together. Unmarried [1 Cor. 7:1-2].
I ask that each of you who read this to understand this is a Christian ministry. Our standards are the teachings and expectations of He who spent three days in Hell so you and I would not have to spend one moment there. I am not going to pabulum feed you with watered-down Scripture to avoid offending anyone, not even myself, or to avoid invading the comfort zone. To get angry at me for sharing with you His expectations of us would be vain and would be the same as shooting the messenger. If you are offended by me telling you that such behaviors in this movie are sinful, you need to take it up with the One who wrote the Rules. I will NOT situationally redefine, counterfeit or conditionally apply His Word to suit modern morality [2 Tim. 3:16].
Possession is a masterful mixture of mystery with romance but with further desensitization to lesbianism (homosexuality). The lesbianism, whether intentional, is effectively presented in a way to maximize the desensitization of us to it but yet mask the real and invisible threat of such practice. There is none of the "reality" of a lesbian relationship other than talk about it and snuggling on a couch. Realize also that this movie is targeted at our youth by the mere fact of PG-13 attached to it. Even rulers and kings of long ago knew that the way to change a culture is to change the kids. Possession is also further desensitization to heterosexual immorality as well by presenting intercourse though private parts are covered [Rev. 2:20, Ps. 12:8]. Possession is also further desensitization to adultery [Prov. 6:32, Prov. 30:20]. Do each of these sins seem no longer sinful to you? Or maybe not as sinful as they used to be? [Ps. 12:8] While each of these sins is as sinful as they were when God made them sinful, now you know why they seem no longer sinful -- we embrace them in and as entertainment. The use of God's name in vain is somewhat rampant but the use of the three/four letter word is light in comparison to other PG-13 movies.
What I have yet to figure out is why these movies seem to promote suicide as a "natural consequence" of a failed homosexual relationship. I wonder what would be revealed by a study on how many movies that present failed homosexual relationships also present suicide as the chic choice to solve all problems. In view of the proven fact that behaviors in movies, good OR bad, can and do create copycat behaviors, this is not a good thing. That this movie presents lesbianism and a plethora of other sinful behaviors is bad enough. But because it presents suicide as a "viable" recourse I am going to break with my own policy and recommend that this movie be seen by no one let alone 13 year old kids (and younger).
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.
*******Food for Daily Thought*******
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):
Offense to God (O)(2):
NO service charges!!!
Donations to the CAP Ministry are Tax Deductible!!!
Christian Media News
|NOTE: The CAP Analysis Model makes no scoring allowances for trumped-up "messages" to excuse or for manufacturing of justification for aberrant behavior or imagery, or for camouflaging such ignominy 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 from the sinful display or the practitioners demonstrating the sinful behavior. This is NOT a movie review service. It is a movie analysis service to parents and grandparents to tell them the truth about movies using the Truth.|
|"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 nearly seven 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.|