Let's talk Film Ratings

[Sean P Kelly]

I just read, with great interest, the Wikipedia article on the MPAA Rating system and it prompted me to start a topic about film ratings.

As you know the MPAA ratings are G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17

The wikipedia article talks about controversies like how today's PG-13 movies are no different than the R movies of 20 years ago and that Roger Ebert is suggesting that the MPAA create an A rating, which would go between R and NC-17.

Another thing I would like to talk about is the differences between the MPAA ratings and the ratings on my side of the pond.

For those who don't know, Canada does not currently have a standard national rating system. Instead, ratings are decided independantly in each province.

The ratings used in Ontario (which are also used in most other provinces) are G, PG, 14A, 18A, and R

Now, you get some interesting things when you compare the MPAA ratings to the Ontario ratings.

For example, the remake of The Omen is opening on Tuesday.

According to the MPAA the movie is:

Rated R for disturbing violent content, graphic images and some language.

However, according to the Ontario Film Review Board, the movie is:

Rated 14A for violence and gory scenes

So, while the movie gets an R in the US, here it gets the Canadian equivalent to a PG-13. In fact most US R films get the 14A rating, unless it's a "hard" R and then it gets an 18A or even R rating.

I could give more, even more interesting, examples (such as R rated films, most recently Brick, getting PG ratings over here), but I think it is time to bring this discussion to you.


Edit: For more information on the Canadian ratings (and how they can even differ from province to province), go here. (actually that whole wiki-article gives good information about film-ratings worldwide - some are quite weird)

[Falco53]

I use the MPAA rating system as a very general guidline. It doesn't tell me if the movie is actually any good, and the content within a PG-13 movie varies greatly.

I think the MPAA is full of morons, mostly because so many martial arts movies are rated R that shouldn't be. What do these idiots do, count punches?

"That's punch five hundred and seventy-two!"

"Just twelve more and it gets an R rating!"

[Koga]

I don't care about movie ratings at all, and haven't since I turned 16 almost 7 years ago.

[Ike]

I'm pretty sure the U.S. is a little pickier about what they want their youth exposed to. Some Canadian radio stations don't even censor their songs, yet when a word slips on the radio down here, people grab their torches and pitch forks.

[Lurch1982]

Originally Posted by Falco53

I use the MPAA rating system as a very general guidline. It doesn't tell me if the movie is actually any good, and the content within a PG-13 movie varies greatly.

I think the MPAA is full of morons, mostly because so many martial arts movies are rated R that shouldn't be. What do these idiots do, count punches?

"That's punch five hundred and seventy-two!"

"Just twelve more and it gets an R rating!"

Actually, yeah. They count things like uses of the word "F**k," and generally the cutoff for a pg13 and R rating just for language is 1 F-bomb. Southpark: The Movie was originally facing an NC-17 JUST for swearing.

As far as violence goes, its extremely biased depending on the style and manner of the movie. Movies like Lord of the Rings (as an example) have fairly graphicly violent scenes, yet get a free pass because its Lord of the Rings. Same with, say, Star Wars (decapitation, numerous deaths, loss of limbs, etc).

Violence Rs and PG13s are almost a joke. The MPAA cares more about profanity and nudity than anything else.

NC17 is a dead rating to begin with due to the morality police threatening to boycott any major theatre chain or retailer for carrying any NC17 movie.

[Sean P Kelly]

Originally Posted by Lurch1982

Actually, yeah. They count things like uses of the word "F**k," and generally the cutoff for a pg13 and R rating just for language is 1 F-bomb.

That's the general rule of thumb. However, depending on the context, some PG-13 movies can have up to 3

Originally Posted by Lurch1982

As far as violence goes, its extremely biased depending on the style and manner of the movie. Movies like Lord of the Rings (as an example) have fairly graphicly violent scenes, yet get a free pass because its Lord of the Rings. Same with, say, Star Wars (decapitation, numerous deaths, loss of limbs, etc).

Yeah, I think the MPAA doesn't care about how much violence there is as long as it's not being performed on a human (Alien Vs Predator -- which features more creature deaths than human ones -- is another example)

[Bomby]

One thing I've always wondered: Why is nudity considered more explicit than violence? I see myself naked every day and it doesn't offend me. If I'm naked in a movie, it's gonna at least get an R rating, but if I shoot you and punch you in the face I might only get stuck with a PG-13, or if I'm lucky even a PG.

I'm not saying that I want to see excessive nudity in films... but it's just an interesting thing to think about.

[Sean P Kelly]

Even though it's rare, nudity does sometimes make it into a PG-13 movie.

The chances of this happening is increased if it's in a non-sexual context (which, of course, is hardly ever)

Off the top of my head, the most prominent nude scene in a PG-13 film is Kate Winslet's in Titanic (I would definitely say if that scene was sexual in any way -- it wasn't -- the movie probably would have recieved an R)

[Les Paul]

Ok.....

[Sir Delicious Rightfoot]

America bugs me when it comes to media.

Or just entertainment in general.

The first thing that sparked me getting pissed at America's policies on Entertainment was O'Riely boycotting Pepsi for using Ludacris as a spokesperson, because he is a rap artist (and he is very explicit with his lyrics). However, when Ozzy came along, O'Riely didn't say a damn word.



WHAT THE I had a dog once.I had a dog once.I had a dog once.I had a dog once.?

Anyway, another big problem with American entertainment is racial sensitivity, and by that I mean, we (as Black folks), complain WAY to much. My brother and I were laughing about that the other day. We came across a lot of cartoons, and in which, the black characters were intellegent/smart/nerdy, not to discredit anyone for anyhting, but that just shows that we're too sensitive, and we can't look at the things we do and laugh. Not if it's white people that are pressing the stereotype. And that bugs me.

But back on topic, with the Movie ratings, I thought that the MPAA was mainly built of Parents? If it is, that's all the more reason why nudity/violence is so strongly rated. Parents today want to shield their kids from EVERYTHING, and the truth is, you can't. Eventually, it'll catch them, and they won't know how to take it. If your kid has been raised well, they can deal with that kind of stuff, if not, then they won't be able to.

on the flipside, some parents need to do a better job of raising their kids. Two 12 year olds just got arrested on marijuana charges the other day, all I could do is shake my head in shame. There are also 13 year old girls gettin' pregnant and all that...yeah, let me stop, I've gotten completly off topic.

[Sean P Kelly]

MPAA run by parents? That's a laugh.

I think you have them confused with the board that started putting parental advisory labels on CDs

[Sir Delicious Rightfoot]

Well, there was something else too. It may not be movies, and it was something besides music, somethin' that actually took ratings.....