My wife and I take in a lot of movies. We both tend to read for enlightenment but go to films for entertainment, so we've seen more than our share of frothy films over the years.

And I think we've seen every LDS movie ever made -- even the ones shot in grandma's backyard on a budget that wouldn't cover for a handbasket of groceries.

''We need to go,'' my wife says. ''We need to support moral movies, even when they're bad.''

I'm sure that's a blurb any LDS filmmaker would love to paste to his movie poster.

Right now, we're looking forward to seeing the new BYU movie "Fire Creek."

I'm sure it will hold up spiritual virtues as a way to live.

I just don't know if it will hold up as a movie.

And that is always the problem -- separating what's "good" from what's "good for you." And that goes for not only movies, but music, dance and books.

The case can be made that if a work of art is badly made, it's not good for anybody.

But for the sake of argument, let's say it can be.

That's why, in my mind, I carry around two separate rating systems. I have an "art" meter and a "heart" meter.

Upon leaving the temple, I remember an old stake president declaring, "Best movie in town!"

I realized, for LDS people, there was no way to ever dispute that.

And that's when I came up with my "two meter" business.

A national film like "No Country for Old Men" would get high marks for art. But on the "heart meter" it would bottom out at zero.

On the other hand, "The Book of Mormon Movie" would get high marks for heart, but low marks for art.

Some of the best films -- such as "Saints and Soldiers" or "Chariots of Fire" -- do well in both.

Such a split in thinking is needed, I think, because LDS people tend to be of two minds.

For some, a movie with a moral message is automatically a good movie. For others, no amount of success in "heart" can make up for failure in the "art."

It's a divide that has existed in religious communities for eons.

Is a third-rate painting of Jesus better than a first-rate painting of Mick Jagger?

You tell me.

Is a superbly crafted rap song always worse than a shoddy hymn?

Does every movie ever made about LDS missionaries automatically trump an R-rated film?

It all comes down to what you believe does the most to feed the soul. And even in communities like the LDS community -- a group the world often sees as more homogenized than milk -- there is room for more than one kind of soul food.

My approach is to sample everything and keep what's good. (That's Paul's advice, not mine).

But then, as with so much in life, my way may not be your idea of "good."