At last, an overhaul for the movie ratings system

pitqe xheog Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 12:32 PM EST

ufbskjayv lrnuopghd aljtbvc vfgqshtmd gmawhbk lfyqogwj htwnjdfe

chris Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 03:35 PM EST

sure, you can release a movie with no rating if you would like, but no theatre chain is going to show it, essentially making the rating mandatory. The ratings as we have it today are a relic, and I am happy to see changes being made. I saw "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" at the Independant theatre, and it was jaw dropping how the system works.

MikeknaJ Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 01:38 PM EST

How is it at all censorship if, as has been so aptly pointed out, you can release the movie with our without a rating? No one is FORCING the film maker to alter the movie to gain a specific rating? Maybe those who cry censorship should actually move to a country where true censorship exists and you actually do not have the freedom to make and release films as you see fit. Sure, the ratings may not be perfect. But these cries of censorship do a disservice to those who actually have to fight against that problem for real.

AmLyn Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 11:59 AM EST

As long as the American ratings system continues to fear a genuine adult rating for its more grownup films they'll continue to have problems with censorship and marketing of them. Here in this province in Canada we have G, PG, 14A (essentially your PG-13), 18A (essentially your R), and then our version of an R rated movie. A movie that no kids can attend. I believe this is what your NC-17 was meant to do but here R carries no stigma or marketing ban or is anything odd. As long as marketers/theater chains are so afraid of "NC-17" then what's the point of rehauling a system that will continue to demand filmmakers cut their movies to conform to some board of censorship?

Miles Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 11:25 AM EST

I don't think it will change much, either. this is just a grand gesture to attempt to keep some of its power. The documentary really let them have it, It makes people realize that the ratings is not mandatory, and that labels itself --- can border on unconstitutional censoring. One specail b%ll$ to the wall film maker, can sue the ratings board in the supreme court, and will probably do enough damage to the secret society to overhaul the entire system.

Pouncer Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 10:40 AM EST

Hallelujah. Valenti was a fossil, and I'm incredibly grateful that Glickman is open to reform. The MPAA should take a hard look at the standards that grant gore-filled violence fests a PG-13 rating and penalize healthy depictions of sexuality with NC-17 ratings.

Lyle Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 10:25 AM EST

I'd be happy if they just make good on that promise to better inform parents about R-rated movies. There have been a number of times where I've been appalled to see kids in very violent films.

OTOH, I'm not sure how much that'll help considering Joe Pantoliono's testimony to congress about parents sending their kids over to say how cool he was on The Sopranos.

Dana Thu, Jan 18, 2007 at 10:03 AM EST

I was completely shocked and amazed by the documentary. Jack Valenti just felt like a left over from the Mcarthy era. It really is disturbingly run like a mafia. But what really shocked me is that in a town that deals with a standard of beauty that is almost unachievable anywhere else... those raters were UGLY AS SIN.

Ellen Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 11:29 PM EST

I don't think it'll change much. The most fair way would be to do some kind of multi-tiered system, so a film could get an R for violence but only a PG-13 for drug use, or something like that. But that won't happen, because the MPAA will assume we're too dumb to figure out why one film could get multiple ratings. (Besides, if a movie contained only one category of objectionable material -- say, R for sex, PG for violence and drug use -- what would be the age restriction?)

If anything, a new system will just move the age restriction on violent movies down (because that's the way it's been trending) and move any kind of sexual content up in age. I haven't seen Dick's documentary, but in reviews I've read I guess it highlights that double standard, and I don't see how the MPAA would fix it. It's a cultural problem that's bigger than just the movies.

Jonathan Jacobs Wed, Jan 17, 2007 at 10:10 PM EST

Great job!

This is a long overdo overhaul of the system. Ratings creep, hard ratings and the like have all harmed the validity of the current system and these steps are all ones that will benefit the film industry in the long run. I just wrote a research paper on the topic and to see that something is happening is great!