First lets look at the history of the ratings. The ratings are issued by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). The MPAA was started in 1922 by the major motion picture studios as a way of self regulation to avoid government censorship. The first head of the MPAA was former Postmaster General Will Hays. He developed what is called the Hay’s Code which had a list of things that could not be in a movie if it was going to be released in the United States. According to the Hays code there could be no immoral behavior in the movie or the movie would not get released. Then in the late 60’s filmmakers started pushing the envelope with what they were showing. This led new head of the MPAA Jack Valenti to try and come up with a different way of reviewing movies without making the filmmaker edit the movie to be released. So with the National Association of Theatre Owners (NATO) he developed the modern ratings system.
The new rating system was started on November 1, 1968. Originally the ratings for a movie were G, M, R, and X. M was changed to PG in 1972, and in the 1980’s they added PG-13 to kind of bridge the gap between PG and R. This was mostly due to parents uproar over the violence in the Indiana Jones movies and Gremlins. This led Steven Spielberg to suggest another rating would be useful. In 1990 the X rating was changed to NC-17 to get away from the notion that an X rating made it a pornographic film. Basically G is General Admittance, PG is Parental Guidance, PG-13 is Parental Guidance for those under 13. The difference between R and NC-17 is one that many people get confused. An R rating means that 17 and under need to be accompanied by and adult and a NC-17 rating means no one 17 and under can see the movie even if with a parent.
So why are filmmakers upset over the ratings? In theory it seems to make sense. Give parents a guide so they can make informed decisions about what their kids watch. I am all for that. There are certain movies should not be allowed to see and it is up to the parents to decide what is appropriate. But there are a number of problems with the system.
One of the biggest problems is the MPAA close association with NATO. National theatre chains are all members of NATO and there is an agreement between NATO and MPAA that any movie rated NC-17 will not be shown in their theatres. Therefore any movie that gets an NC-17 rating will not make any money even if it is good because no one will be able to see it. Also, it makes it harder to advertise since most TV and print media wont show advertisements for NC-17 movies. That is not as much a problem any more with the Internet and low profile movies can still generate a lot of buzz and you can see “red band” trailers online. “Red Band” trailers are trailers for rated R or NC-17 movies that were not approved by the MPAA as suitable for all ages. Also, movie retail stores like Blockbuster and Walmart will not sell or rent any movie with an NC-17 rating. Blockbuster will also not rent any movie that is not rated by the MPAA. So, while the stated purpose of the MPAA ratings is to avoid censorship and while it does not directly censor if a movies gets the dreaded NC-17 rating it sets it up to lose a lot of money. An example is what happened earlier this year with Hatchet 2. A horror movie that came out around Halloween got a NC-17 rating. Every theatre refused to release it unedited. There was one AMC theatre that said they would show it. After showing it on one screen for two days they pulled it off the screen. Their story was that it wasn’t doing well but it appeared to be due to pressure from other theatre chains for showing it.
The other problem with the system is that I feel the ratings are too vague and there is not clear distinction when a movie crosses the line from PG-13 to R to NC-17. Unlike the Hays Code there is no specific criterion for what each rating means. The biggest difference in NC-17 and R is usually sex. Very rarely does a movie get a NC-17 rating strictly for violence or language. Exceptions are as noted above Hatchet 2 for violence and Clerks originally had NC-17 for language. According to the movie This Film is Not Yet Rated the MPAA’s own website says that 4 times as many films receive NC-17 ratings for sex then for violence. So while a movie like Hostel can get an R rating even though it has graphic violence a movie like Blue Valentine gets an NC-17 for one scene of sex. And that sex scene is between a married couple in love. It is not gratuitous in anyway it is just a very raw and passionate scene. Also they do not have to tell the filmmakers why the movie is rated what it is. Sometimes they do and sometimes they don’t. The MPAA appears to favor studio movies over independent movies. A perfect example of that was in 1999 when American Pie and But I’m a Cheerleader came out. Both movies had a masturbation and a sex scene but American Pie got an R rating and But I’m a Cheerleader got an NC-17 rating.
There is an appeals process for movies. And it usually takes a famous star, director, or major studio to get a rating overturned. In the past you were not able to cite precedent. Therefore if you feel that you were not given an appropriate rating you could not reference any other movies to show how your film compares to a scene in that movie. They now allow you to mention other movies but the appeals board can ignore it.
This Film Not Yet Rated is a great movie that really shows a lot of the hypocrisy in the ratings system as it stands today. The movie is sort a tale about censorship and a spy drama. Because the identities of the people on the board are kept private no one knows anything about the members. So to try and find out who are these people giving the ratings Kirby Dick the director of hires a private investigator to find out who they are and hold them accountable. The board is supposed to be made of parents of kids aged 5-17 but during his investigation he found out that is not true of all of them. Also he found out that during the appeals process there is always clergy present. It is not real clear why that is. The best quote form the movie is by Darren Aronofsky. “It seems backwards that to show human sexuality in pretty much any form is getting to R territory while you can shoot as many bodies as long as there is no blood and its PG-13…It should be flipped where if there is violence without blood its fantasy and should be for adults… but if you show violence with blood it should be PG-13 because you can see the consequences.”
Not a parent I am just curious how others choose what movies to let their kids see. I think that the current ratings system is helpful to a point. I think it helps parents to see which movies might be age appropriate but I don’t think it really helps parents see what kind of content is in a movie. R ratings can be for any number of things and for some reason things that can be R in one movie will be NC-17 in another or PG-13 in a different one. I am glad they don’t try to censor the movie’s but all the financial implications from a NC-17 rating is a form of censorship. The website I find very helpful and recommend to my friends that are parents is Kids in Mind . They rate movies based on 3 different categories violence, sexuality and language. So a movie that has 1-1-6 you know has very little violence, very little sex but some cursing. That website also goes into very detailed descriptions of why each movie is rated what it is (Almost too detailed for me as it can give away some spoilers). But if I had kids I think that is the kind of rating system I would like. I would love to hear any parent’s thoughts on this topic.
No comments:
Post a Comment