Click on CAPCon Alert
image for explanation
A service to our youth through you,
their parents and grandparents, in His name by His Word
The Sweetest Thing (2002), R
Analysis Date: April 12, 2002
CAP Score: 41
CAP Influence Density: 2.26
THE SWEETEST THING (R) -- ...little more than a long sequence of sexcapades...
Distributed By: Columbia Pictures
Directed by: Roger Kumble
[Sorry. No further credits to show. Could not open the Internet Movie Database page for this movie.]
One of the protection features our Lord has given me to prevent being corrupted by watching so many movies is I soon forget the movie. This is the case with *The Sweetest Thing*. Fortunately, to give you the findings (the heart of the CAP analysis model) I do not need any memory at all. The listing of findings taken at the time of watching the show tell all that needs to be told. All I can say about it is it is little more than a long sequence of sexcapades of Cameron Diaz, Christina Applegate and Selma Blair. Sexcapades in every sense of the word.
Dim recollections include scenes of extreme vulgarity such as oral sex with the camera showing everything but the genitals. Another with the male getting his piercing hooked somehow in the mouth of Blair, her head being the only thing that hides his genitals. Another was what appeared to be a male member being shoved into the face of Diaz through a hole in a men's restroom Diaz was using. In the same restroom, Applegate used the men's wall urinal. In yet another immoral performance, Blair brings a dress to the cleaners with semen stains on it which the unaware proprietor licks to test it. I do recall some non-vulgar and almost wholesome scenes in *The Sweetest Thing* but who cares? They are masks. To get to them would require exposure to a plethora of filth.
The notes indicate there were other matters of sexual immorality such as inappropriate heterosexual and lesbian touch, homosexual kissing, self touching, imagery of an orgasm, intercourse, etcetera. Sure this is an R-rated film, but a recent report of the American College of Physicians (APC) reveals that of more than 4500 kids in the east (90% of them under 14) only 16% are restricted from watching R-rated movies. And nearly every time I watch an R-rated movie, I see evidence of that finding. Nearly every time. And most of the time I conduct the research during regular school hours. In another publication of movie trivia or something like that, more than twice as many minor kids see movies every week than adults.
Now the APC joins the American Medical Association, the American Psychological Association and many others in agreement on the influence of popular entertainment. Does anyone still wonder why our youth are so worldly and seemingly bitter and dissatisfied with everything?
Sixteen percent!? Does anyone still wonder why I include R-rated programming in the CHILDCare Action Project Ministry analyses? [Luke 17:2]
Speaking to the parents and grandparents of the population of the APC findings, let the listing in the Findings/Scoring section be your guide to whether you want to let your 84% watch this show. I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard a parent say "I wish I had known..."
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.
[The "Food for Thought" Scriptures will serve well the ignominy of *The Sweetest Thing*.]
*******Food for 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):
Christian Media News
Biblical based Management Consulting
|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.|