ITT we bitch about the MPAA's rating system

[The Man]

Originally Posted by the Wikipedia article about Alfonso Cuáron's film Y tu mamá también

Y tu mamá también was a critical success, garnering awards such as the Venice Film Festival best screenplay award. It was also a runner-up for the National Society of Film Critics Awards for Best Picture and Best Director and was nominated for the 2002 Academy Award for Writing Original Screenplay.

This film is also a good example of the widely varying standards in movie rating systems: The movie was released without a rating in the U.S. because it was believed that an NC-17 would be unavoidable. Other countries, such as France or the Netherlands regarded the film fit to be seen by twelve-year-olds. This perceived excessiveness of censoring of sexuality (especially when compared to the much more accepting attitude towards violence) by the MPAA even prompted noted movie critic Roger Ebert to question why movie industry professionals were not outraged: "Why do serious film people not rise up in rage and tear down the rating system that infantilizes their work?"

Originally Posted by the Wikipedia article about This Film Is Not Yet Rated

This Film Is Not Yet Rated is an independent documentary film about the Motion Picture Association of America's rating system and its effect on American culture, directed by Kirby Dick and produced by Eddie Schmidt. It premiered at the 2006 Sundance Film Festival and was released into select theatres on September 1, 2006. The Independent Film Channel, the film's producer, aired the film later that autumn.


The MPAA gave the original cut of the film an NC-17 rating for "some graphic sexual content": scenes that illustrated the content a film could include to garner an NC-17 rating. Kirby Dick has appealed. Descriptions of the ratings deliberations and appeal were included in the documentary. The new version of the film is not rated.

The film discusses disparities the filmmaker sees in ratings and feedback: between Hollywood and independent films, between gay and straight sexual situations, and between violence and sexual content.

Much of the film's press coverage was to Ritchie Bains from Brampton and his crew's use of a private investigator to unmask the identities of the ratings and appeals-board members, a feat that had never been accomplished before, although 60 Minutes and other news organizations have tried.

Other revelations in the film include: the discovery that many ratings-board members either have children 18 and over or have no children at all (typically, the MPAA has suggested it hires only parents with children between the ages of 5 and 17); that the board seems to treat homosexual material much more harshly than heterosexual material (this assertion is supported by an MPAA spokesperson’s statement in USA Today that "We don't create standards; we just follow them"); that the board's raters receive no training and are deliberately chosen because of their lack of expertise in media literacy or child development; that senior raters have direct contact in the form of required meetings with studio personnel after movie screenings; and that the MPAA's appeals-board is just as secretive as the ratings board, its members being mostly movie theater chain and studio executives. Also included on the appeals-board are two members of the clergy (one Catholic and one Episcopalian, who may or may not have voting power).

Prior to Sundance, the film sparked initial press interest when it was handed an NC-17 rating by the MPAA for 'some graphic sexual content.' When it premiered at Sundance, the film's ratings deliberations, along with Kirby Dick’s appeal, were included in the documentary. Since the film had changed dramatically from the time of the NC-17 rating, the film cannot be released with an MPAA rating without the film being resubmitted for review.

The film went on to draw crowds at many other festivals, including South by Southwest and the Seattle International Film Festival, and was slated for theatrical release in the Fall of 2006.

Discuss.

[Godiva]

tbh being a tooth sucking limey, I don't know too much, but what I do know riles and angers me.

When I heard about 'This Film is Not Yet Rated' I looked up some info about it and was pretty shocked by the system - something like the MPAA is basically made up of the big 4 movie studios, so independent movies will tend to be more harshly rated for a little nudity or violence, whereas a big studio movie with violence and nudity will get just an R rating to make sure it rakes in the big bucks. That's insane.

as I say, I'm not american so I don't know much, but I've always thought the rating system was ****ed.

Also, I really want to see that movie (TFINYR).

[The Man]

I haven't seen it yet myself, but I intend to do so fairly soon.

[Lye]

the rating system only really affects movies that hope to become commercially successful. any independent movie making the festival rounds is not going to be affected by it. I don't think I've been to a festival that had a film in it that was rated. eberts whole "why doesn't the film community rise up?" question makes it sound like its a huge deal, when it really isn't. sure some indy movies get popular, but unless they have graphic violence and sex they will most likely get a R rating.

The system could definitely be improved. I've always felt that our cultures general views on sex and nudity were childish. but when you compare it to countries like india or iran, we have it made. though there is incentive for studios to cut stuff out to avoid getting NC17 ratings, it isn't really censorship in that its illegal to have that kind of stuff. I think that if anything, the popularity of dvds and whatnot have shown that many adults don't give a **** about the rating of a movie, as nonrated and unrated cuts of movie are pretty popular. and I'm talking about real uncut editions, not this **** these distribution companies have been pulling lately.

I think that once people show the studios that they can release movies that are nc17, without suffering economic tragedy, the whole problem would be solved. of course they would need to grow some balls and release a nc17 movie worth going to see, which is never going to happen because hollywood is full of wimps. It would probably start a trend, but who wants to risk it right? better play it safe by remaking old classics into half-assed travesties.

I just think it would be too much work with no real positive outcome to go back and rewrite the rating system.

[The Man]

The biggest critique, I felt, was that a lot of movies that deserve PG or PG-13 ratings get R ratings because the MPAA are so squeamish about sex, especially when it's in indie films.

There are a few films that were released as NC-17 to start out. Midnight Cowboy and A Clockwork Orange being two of them. But I think they were both re-rated back to R later on.

[Lye]

actually they were rated x, which didn't really mean anything other then they were for a more adult audience.

Nowadays the rating system has more to do with demographic then it does with subject content. horror movies and comedies are watered down to get a pg 13 rating, because more teenagers will go see it. rated r movies are aimed at the 18-35 demographic. the matrix isn't really a R rated movie. it has some violent deaths in it, but it got a r rating, because of the demographic it was trying to appeal to. Just as the movie titanic has nudity in it but was given a pg13 rating so that all those teenage girls could go see it. I think that that is the problem must people have with it, but its just a way for the studios to better present their movie to the people they think would most enjoy it.

and I honestly can't imagine a indy filmmaker caring about whether their movie is r rated or pg 13. the big problem is when it is nc17, because many studios are reluctant to back NC17 movies.
It just doesn't seem to be that big of a deal to me, and compared to some other countries rating system, it doesn't look all that bad. maybe its because I've over the age of 18 and can see any movie i want, and because I have never had to deal with the mpaa.

either way, it just seems like one of those things some people pick out of a hat to complain about for no other real reason then to complain about sometime about the movie industry.