Movieguide approves of blue material

Movieguide, “the family guide to movies and entertainment,” weighs in on The Smurfs.

They smurfing loved it.

It received three out of four stars, with a +1 content acceptability rating for BBB, C, CapCap, Ho, L, V, N, A.

For those unfamiliar with Movieguide’s unique content rating system:

BBB: “Very strong biblical or moral worldview, principles, perspective or character”

C: “Mild or light Christian worldview or elements, Gospel witness, redemptive elements, or positive reference to Jesus Christ, Christianity or a Christian church or service”

Cap: “Capitalism” (“CapCap” is twice as much capitalism as “Cap,” “CapCapCap” is the top rating)

Ho: “Light homosexual worldview or homosexuality (incl. sodomy & lesbianism)” (This is, for Movieguide, the least offensive “Ho” rating. The worst is “HoHoHo.” No, that’s not a joke.)

L: “Few obscenities and profanities (1-9)”

V: “Brief or action violence”

N: “Naturalistic nudity (not in a sexual context)”

A: “Light, brief or some alcohol use”

Movieguide does not have a content rating for the one thing that might entice me to watch The Smurfs once it reaches Hulu — NPH.

From Movieguide’s review of The Smurfs:

Very strong moral worldview with some redemptive elements of sacrifice, some strong capitalist elements of competing and advertisements, with some light implied homosexual content, including a comment by Smurfette that she “kissed a Smurf, and I liked it” (alluding to the homo-erotic song by Katy Perry, “I kissed a girl, and I liked it”), as well as light magic, but the focus is on making a moral statement about good triumphing over evil and the value of family and friendship over getting ahead and getting rich; no explicit foul language (but at times the use of the word “Smurf” to replace an obvious obscenity, e.g., “Smurf me” is annoying), one blasphemous comment about how a character can go and work for God if they fail at their job, and a few scatological jokes, such as “I think I just Smurfed in my mouth”; lots of light action and comic violence such as plenty of chases, destruction of Smurf village, Gargamel gets smashed by a tree trunk defense system, a Smurf throws a human a punch, a human attempts to beat Smurfs with umbrella, Gargamel viciously whacks a (digital) cat and sucks Smurfs into a leaf vaccum in order to extract their essence via torture, Smurfs attack Gargamel with golf balls, Smurfette throws nail in (digital) cat’s mouth, Gargamel is sent flying through the air and upon landing is smashed by a bus; no sex scenes or crudity but Smurfette puts on a sexy dress and stands on top of vent replicating the famous Marilyn Monroe scene, sexy models staff a party to sell cosmetic products with their looks; upper male Smurf nudity; cocktail party in central park for product launch; no smoking or drugs; and, nothing else objectionable.

I’d write more, but my brain is caught in a loop, flashing between “some strong capitalist elements of competing and advertisements” and, for smurf’s sake, “upper male Smurf nudity.”

The review concludes by commending the movie’s values, because:

At the end of the day, the Smurfs will never hesitate to sacrifice their own happiness – even their life – to save a fellow Smurf.

I wanted to try to say something intelligent about whether that can really be reconciled with movieguide’s praise, in the same review, of competition-based ethics. But trying to say anything intelligent just now is difficult, as those thoughts quickly get replaced by the phrase “upper male Smurf nudity,” rendering me speechless.