Oh, there’s lots of stuff. You just don’t watch it. The were and are dozens of shows about angels, movies aimed evangelical christians.
I sometimes encounter these things, but like libertarian fantasies and pro-cop propaganda, they are usually so preachy and self-serving, that they make uninteresting stories and storytelling.
I can’t help but remark that this used to be the usual behaviour of my christianized ancestors when they encountered pre-Christian Roman statues.
Anyway, may I ask how old your kids are? Because there’s quite clearly a PG/FSK-12 label on that movie.
They bleep-ing bleep @midnight? The show that airs alongside commercials for Vivid Entertainment?
No, but I’m bothered that Hull (UK City of Culture 2017) is considered offensive.
Yeah, I mean, it’s not like it’s M******brough.
(apologies for the resolution)
Why do you quote something back to me that I quoted, and quoted it to make a point that this is the wrong approach, as a suggestion?
I have five kids. My youngest is 5 and my oldest is 16.
Wasn’t my intention, sorry. I assumed that the BBS would be smart enough to keep the quotation character, attributing it properly. Didn’t want to attribute to you, but rather add to it. Should have checked the result, though.
Ah. Well then, I suppose the sixteen year old should be able to handle it. Mind you, I take these things as guidelines, too, there are a few FSK shows my 5 year old might watch in his hour of TV time. But it’ll be another 7 years before he’ll get to The Goonies and Star Wars.
Fair enough.
It did confuse me, but that has a tendency to happen anyway…
Thanks for supporting my right to filter content. Seems like Hollywood would be all over this because everything is the people’s right these days. A woman’s right to choose, the right to be LGBTQ, and my right to filter content… seems like such a double standard…
I love my swear words and violence as much as the next guy, but it does occasionally make me cringe when a gratuitous scene comes on something I’m watching with my kids. Does that mean I should only be allowed to watch cartoons until they’re adults, even if some of the movies I filter have great moral messages amidst the content I choose not to bring into my home? VidAngel is awesome and regardless of the reason, I thank you for using this platform to support it.
Thank you for a reasoned and fair analysis of VidAngel. I mostly miss the $1 movies, 
I bleeping love Vid Angel! Thank you for this post!
It was wonderful to see The Big Short sans swearing.
You’d think the studios would be delighted for this, as it doesn’t change the content for anyone but the viewer in their personal home, yet brings in a large market of people willing to pay for their content that were otherwise never going to see it.
Usually Hollywood and big business jump on money making opportunities like that, but instead they refuse to sell VidAngel licenses and are trying to snuff them out.
I’m sure Netflix and Amazon will see an increase in subscriptions now that VidAngel can be attached to them.
There’s also the copyright part: While past bowdlerizers may have used clearly unauthorized derivative works, either out of laziness or technical necessity, this implementation is just a scripted set of commands for the media player, not functionally dissimilar from a playlist, or storing where you left off so you can resume an audiobook.
There are basically three ways to argue against the right to distribute such command scripts; and all of them are dangerous overreach.
You can just sort of handwave; and argue that because the effect looks like an unauthorized derivative work it should be treated as one regardless of the method. Aside from being shoddy nonsense; such a claim basically boils down to “If we think it feels like copyright infringement, it’s copyright infringement.”
You can argue that, while not derivative in the sense that a recut video is, the command script is ‘derived’ from the film in the sense that it is specifically crafted to have the desired effect, skip the appropriate scenes, etc. based on whatever film it is designed for. Aside from stretching the bounds of ‘derived’ well into ‘loosely inspired by’ territory; this would basically amount to a claim that anything crafted in response to a copyrighted work is a derivative work, which might have one or two little unfortunate implications.
Finally, of course, you can try the DRM approach and attempt to make forbidding this sort of capability a condition of obtaining the licenses necessary to legally decode whatever flavor of DRM you have control over. This one is probably the most solid legally(if only for future formats; going back and rewriting the rules for licensing CSS decoders or AACS probably isn’t possible at this point); but it is hardly what you would call a wholesome trend. We’ve all seen what wholesome and deeply insufferable purposes DVD User Operation Prohibition has been put to(The viewers will love these previews; so much we’d better make them mandatory!) and that mechanism is pitifully rudimentary compared to what someone really control-freaking about the playback could fairly easily implement. Not a good path to go down.
I love VidAngel! I have 2 girls who are 9 and 7. The hubs and I are huge Star Wars fans. With VidAngel we were able to block any violent content. Now my girls are huge Star Wars fans as well! 
This isn’t for “triggered evangelicals”, it’s for families!! And I’m thankful for it!!
Thanks for bringing attention to this. One of my favorite VidAngel filters was there Jarjar Binks filter. You could watch all the prequels pretty much without him. I watched several movies where all I filtered out were the sex scenes because I don’t feel like I need to watch other people getting it on. Those scenes are rarely plot essential anyway. shrug
Thank you, CommentAngel™!
Really? I think you might have just justified the whole endeavour in a single sentence.
