Comments for Now Showing at http://www.thecatholicthing.org , comment 1 to 10 out of 10 comments http://www.thecatholicthing.org Wed, 19 Jun 2013 18:43:50 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4247 I agree with Michael. Painting nude bodies in respectful ways is in no way aesthetically or morally comparable to the soft-core porn that one finds in The Tudors. I generally appreciate Mr. Miner's writings, but this article seems too timid in its approach to the abuse of sexual imagery in movies and television. I'm neither a psychologist nor a puritan, but I can't help thinking that deliberate repeated viewing of such things is likely to lead to coarsening of our own sexual sensibilities. - dannyboy Sun, 07 Mar 2010 16:19:16 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4227 Isn't there a significant difference between a painting such as the ceiling of the Sistine chapel and having an actor expose him or her self in front of others and a camera? Placing a naked human body in a sexual context for the purpose of presenting a story is putting an actor in an occasion of sin. Its clearly not modest! I believe we need to think beyond its impact on us. In addition, the harm to our selves may be very subtle and we should be hesitant to assume that its not affecting us. - Michael Fri, 05 Mar 2010 10:00:26 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4188 I have never seen the tudors, but it cant be as bad or as riducolous as "Rome" or "Spartacus: Blood and Sand". Both shows, besides the often ahistorical content, were awash in sex, to absurd levels. I mean "Rome" advirtisement should have been, 'who will have sex next episode on Rome?!' I know the Romans were decadent, but there is a big difference between portraying something, and indulging in something. Not to mention that for shows taking place B.C., there sure was alot of foul language. - Give me a break already! Mon, 01 Mar 2010 18:18:53 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4187 Simple answer to the question about the sexual content of later episodes of "The Tudors": No, it doesn't diminish. I'm afraid the producers have decided that the right approach to their series is to attract the widest audience possible. Catholics? Got stuff for them. History buffs: Got that too. Folks who like naked ladies: No problem. It's a shame, because the artistic values are quite high. - Brad Miner Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:41:16 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4186 Does it get better, less hard core, than the first few episodes? - Austin Ruse Mon, 01 Mar 2010 14:32:46 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4185 Can't disagree, really. The sexual content in "The Tudors" is far beyond what's necessary to demonstrate Henry was lecherous. This is why I added a postscript to the author bio at the end of the column: He wishes it to be known that he is not recommending “The Tudors,” although he is a fan. - Brad Miner Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:52:39 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4184 I watched the first three episodes of The Tudors and found it to be almost hard core porn and stopped watching. I am told the sex settled down in subsequent episodes and years so i may give it another try, but those first few, wow, a bit much. - Austin Ruse Mon, 01 Mar 2010 10:46:25 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4182 I can't speak to the series mentioned, but agree there are times when explicitly displayed sexuality in movies can be illuminating. Such was the case in The Reader, a remarkable film that begins with an affair between a teen and a woman twice his age and evolves into a moral and ethical dilemma that has nothing to do with sex. Nonetheless, without the carnal preamble, much of the rest of the film would not have resonated so profoundly on a different plane. - Joseph Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:59:09 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4181 Being something of an Anglophile, owing to British contributions to literature and human freedom, I've tried watching The Tudors. Sadly, I find the nudity and sex scenes just too much. They are, for me, an insurmountable obstacle to any enjoyment of the stories being told. - Lauri Friesen Mon, 01 Mar 2010 09:58:39 +0100 http://www.thecatholicthing.org/columns/2010/now-showing.html#comment-4180 Great piece. I do agree lust and full body nudity do not necessarily lead people to sin. With respect to The Tudors, although in a few instances historically inaccurate, does probably tell it the way it was. No doubt those beautiful females at court were there to serve Henry's pleasures. It often comes to mind the irony of the fact that 500 years ago as the New Religion was being vigorously assailed by Paul III, It is on the fast tract back to Rome via Benedict. Yes, It is a very Catholic! - Willie Mon, 01 Mar 2010 08:35:25 +0100