MPAA and Movie Ratings

First, this should be in Serious Discussion, and not Entertainment, because this isn't just asking about opinions. It's almost political, if people keep it that way.

The MPAA, otherwise known as the Motion Picture Association of America, basically rates all movies that come out in America and decides their fates, in a way. If a movie is deemed to be too "adult," it will not get an R rating and will instead get an NC-17 rating. This can kill a movie because an NC-17 rating will often not be shown in movie theaters. Most theaters will simply refuse to show any movie rated NC-17. This is important because most big-budget movies earn the majority of their money from theaters.

This makes sense on the surface. Movies with adult content should be given appropriate ratings. Of course, you just need to dig a little to see that the system is comprised mostly of bullshit. First of all, an R rating means that people under 17 cannot get in without an adult. An NC-17 rating means that no one under 17 can get in. A very small difference for a huge impact. What concerns me is that a lot of R rated movies shouldn't have people under 17 in there, even if they're with an adult. Hostel, Saw, those kinds of movies shouldn't be seen by kids. Yeah, a 16-year-old is probably old enough to see Saw, but a 16-year-old is also probably old enough to see the unedited edition of American Pie, which got an NC-17.

The big problem has for years been the horrible ordeal that movie makers have to go through if their movie gets an NC-17 rating. The MPAA tells them what's "wrong" with the movie and what should be trimmed down or cut out completely. For example, if you have two naked men kissing, or a woman giving a guy a handjob, the MPAA would tell you to cut that stuff out. Even if the scenes make sense in the movie, and even if you do not expect or want anyone under the age of 18 to see your movie, you still have to obey what the MPAA says. Or, you can accept their initial rating and try to appeal the rating. In the appeals process, some random people who work for the MPAA (though not on the ratings board) watch the movie, hear the director's reasons for why the movie should be rated whatever, and then the group votes on what rating they think should be given to the movie. The director has to win by at least two-thirds in order to get the MPAA's initial rating overturned.

All this still makes some sense, but the last time I'm going to mention takes what sense is left and sticks it up its own ass - Violence is perfectly fine, but sex is a no-no. Time and time again, the MPAA has given R ratings to movies with a ton of violence in them, only requiring a few cuts (if any), while forcing movies with any sort of sex in them to be chopped to bits in order to get an R rating. If the sex is homosexual, the movie makers might as well get ready for a straight-to-DVD release. If a man slits the throat of a woman and blood spurts everywhere, that's fine. But if a lesbian simulates going down on her girlfriend of five years, even if there is zero nudity, the MPAA will raise hell. That's the worst problem with the MPAA, in my opinion, because it's such a horrible double-standard. Violence is great on TV, violence is great in movies, violence is even great in real life, and sex is horrible, it cannot be shown, unless it's used to sell something. Then, it's perfectly fine.

Anyways, what does everyone think about the MPAA? Are they shitty as fuck, or are they doing a bang-up job? Do you think movie ratings are fair? Would you be less inclined or more inclined to see a NC-17 rated movie, or would it matter? Would you be upset if a NC-17 rated movie didn't have full-frontal nudity and people having realistic sex? Do you think there should be a second group that gives out movie ratings? Do you think the movie rating system needs an overhaul? Do you think the people who bitch about the MPAA are crazy and need to be slapped? Let loose here. Say whatever you really think.

Also, I am very curious what people who don't live in the US have to say about this. Is there a group that rates movies in your country that is shitty or does a good job? Does your country have a lot of censorship, movie-wise, or can a lot more be shown than in America?

But that is all that people can give you.

First and foremost le questionaire
I can't speak for everyone, but it's mostly about that age of consent bullshit. Sure it would be nice to see some fair ratings but what do you expect from a culture that looks down on sex and arousal.
Unfair
The ratings help me decide which ones are sissy films. So yea, higher rating = more interesting film.
Yes. If it is meant for adults then I should be able to use my special privilege of consent to see some fucking titties and pussy.

There's not much I can say about the rating system we have because of my lack of knowledge about it. Even though people should be free to watch whatever they fucking want and all the responsibility would fall on the parents if their child became mind fucked, I doubt that anyone would support that. This post is probably beneath your expectation, but what the fuck ever. It's not like we're gonna change anything. Unless someone actually takes this shit seriously enough to protest or something.

I grew up more mature then many of my generation, not saying much really but I believe the rating system is nothing but crap since it's highly influenced by normal law and the many parents feel that specific stuff in movies/shows is detrimental or have psychological affect on kids.

If I want to see a movie I just pick it up and watch it I've long since stopped looking at the rating.


rbz123 wrote:


^ using that as my excuse.

My general thought is that society as a whole frown on the natural sexual act even if it is just for pleasure as it is a large portion of the time, as such are becoming more and more restricted I guess is the word I'm looking for.

That's all I have to say for now.

As always that was a well thought out post as well as replies. I didn't like the rating system when I was younger, but it looks better as I get older. I however don't like that NC-17 movies often do not get shown and get almost no advertising as theaters and companies do not want to be connected to them.

The problem I have is the fourth paragraph where ShaggyJebus explains what the MPAA tells directors what to change to get a lower rating. I've both read and heard from sources (can't remember off the top of my head), that the MPAA reviwers don't tell directors exactly what is wrong. They give a vague reason like 'NC-17 for graphic sex' or 'excessive violence.' The directors might have an idea what it was that is excessive, but the MPAA doesn't tell them it was scene x for doing x.

I agree in that the MPAA is lax on violence and very prudish on sex. If a woman orgasms, and the movie shows no nudity, that is grounds for an NC-17 rating.


It wouldn't matter for me, it's just another rating, I would however choose to see an unrated/NC-17 movie over it's R counter-part as that's how the director initially wished it to be seen.


Not at all, the MPAA gives out stupid ratings for stupid reasons and when I watch a movie, I care about the viewing experience, not an arbitrary rating prudes in a room give it.

No.Yes.No.


Its all a question of maturity for me. It would be great for people to see whatever movie they please, it would help sell tickets, and ease up a little on people sneaking into theaters. If a parent lets their kids see rated R movies, let them in.

The MPAA is just so old fashioned when they give out ratings, its time they went through some serious overhaul. Let the directors make their movies instead of cutting their original ideas. Why is America so protective of anything sexual unlike other countries (Japan) while so liberal in the crap that is torture porn. Blood and gore is fine, but there's a point where it just gets old and sick.

I remeber when I was like 16-18 at most, I pay movie ticket for a boring movie that's not worth watching and buy snack + soda like usual.

Then walk right into the Movie I wanted to watch in first place, ratings be damned. Espically if rating claimed it's too horrible for me. Or something like that. I don't watch very much cinemas. At most, before I went to univ, once a month to once every few months.

So yeah, it's unsupervised, and I risked getting kicked out, and well if I got kicked out I won't go to the same theater again. But never happened.

bah, I've already heard something about that stuff happening in the US. It looks to me like that MPAA recruits only people with serious problems in their sexual lives, co they rather watch a movie with hundreds of people dying than innocent pretending of sex.

I'm just really glad we don't have so strict cinemas laws. I don't see much movies (I think about 1 or 2 of those big hits per year) rated as "not availible under 18"