This Film is Not Yet Rated

[MurphyMan]

Anyone seen this great Documentary on the Over-Censorship of Sex in American MPAA Ratings, and how movies get away with grisly Violence in lower ratings than NC-17, but sex is Butchered??

 

[JackBauer]

I've seen it. it was cool, but they spent a lot of it talking about things that were already pretty obvious (eg: Jack Valenti's full of s#!t; the MPAA treats the majors better than independents). revealing the board members was pretty damn good though.

 

[hammerhedd11]

This looked pretty interesting. when does this come out on DVD?

 

[MurphyMan]

It comes out on DVD, on the 23rd of January, 2007. So, next week in other words. It is VERY INTERESTING.

 

[Timstuff]

Honestly I don't really care, because none of the movies I'm into have been affected by the MPAA's "overcensoring." Except maybe Chronicles of Riddick, but some would argue that it would have been better as an R-rated movie anyway.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Well, here's my two cents...

The MPAA seems to be heavily influenced by the mass public, especially adults over 35 or so. Many of them are parents of small children, and like it or not, explicit sexual content is often seen as the "greater of two evils", violence being the other in most cases. Parents at large are (seemingly) more willing to have the film industry educate their kids about violence, rather than teach them unhealthy attitudes about sex. My personal opinion is that the MPAA should judge both, not just one of them. That's one of the many reasons why ratings often have a content description added to them.

Example: "R - Restricted, for language, violence, disturbing images, and overt sexuality."

the sad fact is that many people don't bother paying attention to those descriptions. they think, "PG-13, and my kid is 16...no problem", instead of taking the content into account and being responsible for what gets into their kids through the silver screen. It boils down to a moral debate about whether or not certain content is truly acceptable, and since everyone has a different opinion...well, the point is that it is the job of parents as well as the media to safeguard this generation from decline, and at the moment, only about a third of either group are taking that responsibility seriously.

 

[MurphyMan]

Actually MPAA is a small little group of people, which include Members of Church organizations and people who's kids are 20+. I really do not Like Censorship in anyway, shape or form. Censorship is changing the way something is meant to be to me. Why don't they just release what is now called "NC-17" under the "R", with a better Description of the content to decide on whether you want to watch or not. Or just make them "Unrated" and release them "Unrated."
However, anything not given a rating, is A)Not released widely or B)Not advertised or C) NC-17 is banned from certain stores when renting.

 

[Timstuff]

Actually MPAA is a small little group of people, which include Members of Church organizations and people who's kids are 20+.

You have either been grossly misinformed or you have a very narrow view that you assumed was correct.

The MPAA is the Motion Picture Associaition of America. They are a lot more than just a ratings board. All movies in theaters get registered for release through them, not just for ratings purposes but for archival reasons as well (you know that funny looking symbol you almost always see at the end of a movie's credits? That's theirs.)

The MPAA is not a tiny little group of "cuhrch people." Some of the people who evaluate movies for release might be religious, but also many are not. The movies' raters, from what I can understand, are usually selected from the poeple who actually care about ratings-- usually, they're parents. It's not like they have the same tiny little group evaluating every single movie that releases.

 

[Kritish]

Censorship from the MPPA is yet another form of facism.

As long as it isn't porn let it be shown in normal theatres.