In your Aug. 15 column, you ...
Question: In your Aug. 15 column, you commented that you didn't understand the market for edited R-rated movies on broadcast and basic-cable television. I was a little surprised by that remark, because it was somewhat insensitive for you. The market for edited-for-TV movies exists because there are many people who really want to see
Titanic (yes, I know it's PG-13) but don't necessarily want an extended view of
Kate Winslet's breasts. It exists because there are people who want to see an inspirational story like
The Shawshank Redemption, but don't necessarily want the F-word hurtled at them numerous times. These are the same people who would probably enjoy
Deadwood or
The Sopranos were it not for HBO inserting as much profanity as possible just because they can (a topic you have also addressed). The fact is that many people avoid R-rated movies in theaters because of moral or religious objections. With the "offending" material cut from TV airings, at least these people can experience much of the heart of great films that just happen to have an odd nude scene or profanity that doesn't have that much to do with the film's inherent quality. Granted, this is kind of moot with something like
American Pie (which inexplicably shows up on TV all the time), but you get the idea. Your column is so wonderfully written and your observations so astute and entertaining that it is rather disheartening when you show disdain (as you have before) for people whose moral standards differ from your own. The question I have for you has to do with the ever-relaxing standards of basic-cable and even broadcast TV. Where do people who object to profanity and graphic sex go once these outlets go the route of HBO? Are they forever condemned to the type of insipid fare that PAX once showed?
Answer: Points taken. I object more to the commercial breaks than to the editing, I suppose. Ever since I got my first VCR 20-odd years ago, I never again wanted to watch a movie on TV the old-fashioned way. The letter I was responding to wasn't making the "moral" objections you do, so that's why I didn't take that into account. No disparagement intended. And I wish I had a comforting answer for you about the slippery slope into 24/7 "edginess" in network and basic-cable TV. As the networks continue to chase the younger demographic, trying to seem hip at all costs (which often means innuendo and worse), safe refuges will be harder and harder for people to find. I suppose it would also help if all of those people who decry the lack of quality family programming would watch shows like
American Dreams in bigger numbers. Is it any comfort that
7th Heaven is still WB's highest-rated show? Maybe not, given your astute PAX comment.
