(2 of 2)
Generally the viewers are asked for an opinion of the picture as a whole and the reasons for their classification, at other times to discuss the moral implications of a specific point. The Sandpiper, for example, raised a question about religion: Was there thematic justification for making Richard Burton an Episcopal priest rather than a layman? The consensus was yes, but the Legion gave the movie a disapproving B because the Christian (Burton) seems to lose out morally to the naturalist (Elizabeth Taylor).
Something Still Wrong? Inevitably, the Legion now appears too liberal to some, still too cautious to others. Roman Catholic Film Critic William Mooring, whose "Hollywood in Focus" column is syndicated in 41 diocesan newspapers, charges that "moderates" have been replaced in the ranks of Legion reviewers by liberals—"chiefly influenced by Jesuits"—who have an unCatholic tolerance for immoral movies. But many people agree with America's film critic Moira Walsh, herself a Legion consultor, who argues that something is still wrong with a rating system that can condemn a serious attempt at cinema art like The Pawnbroker for the sole reason that it shows a young woman baring her bosom.
The Legion is the only organization of consequence in the U.S. that makes an effective judgment of what is morally in or out of bounds. Legion officials note that many Protestants follow its ratings, which are carried by some secular newspapers, and that Hollywood producers will grudgingly excise scenes or dialogue in films for the sake of a better rating. Next step in the Legion's metamorphosis is a change in its name to the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures, which will suggest less the naysayer than the subtle critic that puts an intelligent finger on what's wrong with the movies.