Movie "Birth"--entertainment or inappropriate?

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/10/28/earlyshow/leisure/celebspot/main652136.shtml

In a nutshell, Nicole Kidman plays a grieving widow who meets a ten year old boy and falls in love with him she thinks he is the reincarnation of her dead husband. In one scene, they are in the bathtub together. Kidman claims it is non-sexual, but really, in the bathtub together and it isn't sexual?

Do you think this movie is harmless entertainment about the supernatural, or do you think it is child inappropriate content?

Gold Dragon said:

I assume he knows all sorts of details and secrets that nobody else should know and it freaks her out.

Click to expand...

I saw a interview with Kidman on Wednesday after the game and she said that the character Anna falls in love with the little boy because she wants to believe that he is her dead husband. He doesn't have any convincing details of their lives or anything, he merely observes her life and the pictures she has around of her and the Dead Hubby, then tells her what she needs to hear.

The interviewer, who saw the movie, said that he couldn't believe that an adult would fall for the child based on his claim to be the DH's reincarnation, but Kidman said she can totally identify with the idea, because when a woman really loves and man then loses him, she will believe anything that might return that lost love to her. She said that on some level Anna knows the boy is not her husband but she wants him to be so she lets the deception take hold in her heart.

She said over and over that the tub scene is not supposed to be sexual, just an expression of the love she still has for the DH and that the character needs to do the scene because she has unresolved feelings for the husband. I don't think a nude scene between a boy and an unrelated woman can be anything other than sexual, even if the movie's makers didn't intend it to be that way. Several theaters are saying they are reluctant to show the film for fear of breaking the laws against kiddie inappropriate content.

Holly3278 said:

I definitely won't be seeing the movie! This is just way overboard in my opinion. Here is a good Christian review of the movie:

http://christiananswers.net/spotlight/movies/2004/birth2004.html

Click to expand...

Good article, especially the ten points refuting reincarnation from a Christian perspective.

Ten Refutations of Reincarnation

1. It is contradicted by Scripture (Heb 9:27).
   
2. It is contradicted by Biblical witness in all Christian churches.
   
3. It would reduce the Incarnation (referring to Christ’s incarnation) to a mere appearance, the crucifixion to an accident, and Christ to one among many philosophers or great thinkers. It would also confuse what Christ did at Calvary.
   
4. It implies that God made a mistake in designing our souls to live in bodies, that we are really pure spirits in prison or angels in costume.
   
5. It is contradicted by psychology and common sense, for its view of souls as imprisoned in alien bodies denies the natural psychosomatic unity.
   
6. It entails a very low view of the body, as a prison, a punishment.
   
7. It usually blames sin on the body and the body’s power to confuse and darken the mind. This is passing the buck from soul to body, as well as from will to mind, and a confusion of the reality of sin with ignorance.
   
8. The idea that we are reincarnated in order to learn lessons we failed to learn in a past earthly life is contrary to both common sense and basic educational psychology. I cannot learn something if there is no continuity of memory. I can learn from my mistakes only if I remember them. People do not usually remember these past “reincarnations.”
   
9. The supposed evidence for reincarnation, ‘rememberings’ from past lives that come out under hypnosis or “past life regression” can be explained—if they truly occur at all—as mental telepathy from other living beings, from the souls of dead humans in purgatory or hell, or from demons. The real possibility of the latter should make us absolutely terrified about opening our souls to “past life regressions.”
   
10. Reincarnation cannot account for itself. Just why are our souls imprisoned in bodies? Is it the just punishment for evils we committed in past reincarnations? But why were those past reincarnations necessary? For the same reason. But the beginning of the process that justly imprisoned our souls in bodies in the first place—this must have antedated the series of bodies. How could we have committed evil in the state of perfect, pure, heavenly spirituality? Further, if we sinned in that paradise, it is not paradisical after all. Yet that is the state that reincarnation is supposed to lead us back to after all our embodied yearnings are over.