Films and The Rating System - Essay Example

?Introduction In a year, around 600-700 movies are made in Hollywood. These movies are made by different directors, technicians and studios.We have indeed been blessed with a pool of wide variety of filmmakers and studios. Due to this, almost 90% of these movies will have a different nature when compared to the each other. Today, each filmmaker thrives hard to go into a new direction; they try very hard to be different from others. That is why, we got the mind bending ‘Inception’, the visually stunning ‘Avatar’ and the poetic ‘The Tree of Life’, just to name a few. But have you ever wondered what differentiates or rather categorize these movies apart from the storyline, filmmakers, studios and cast? Have you ever thought as a common man, whether a particular movie is suitable for their kids? Or how do you decide, whether the content of a particular movie is viewable for all? Here comes the importance of ratings. Now, when I say ratings, it does not have anything to do with the critics’ ratings or the reviews. By issuing a rating, the body which issues these ratings seeks to inform parents of the level of certain aspects and contents found in a particular movie. It may include certain level of violence, sex, drugs, language, thematic material, adult activities, etc. that are not suitable for all kinds of viewers. Despite all the strict norms for rating a movie based on these conditions, most big budget films get away with the adult contents and get rated as either PG or PG 13 even when they exhibit contents that can actually rate them as R. It is also a sad fact that the low profile and low budget movies get hard rated even when they don’t deserve such ratings. This paper makes an analysis of why big budget movies get away with the adult content compared to the strict rating exercised on low profile movies. In addition to this, a brief explanation of the rating system and its evolution is also covered through. Rating System and Transition Evolution and Transition: It was in 1922 that the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) started issuing ratings for motion pictures. MPAA is a voluntary system. As such not all movies are rated by them. Movies that are submitted to MPAA for ratings get through the process. Since it is a voluntary system it is not enforced by law, however, almost all the movie theatres will not screen an unrated domestic films and most of the big gun studios have come to a consensus that it would submit all its titles for ratings before the theatrical release. A lack of a uniform body to rate movies affected the filmmakers prior to establishment of MPAA; this led to the formation of MPAA in 1922. MPAA rated the movies based on a general production code administration which was popularly known as, ‘The Hays Code.’ It was a strict and stringent rating system, due to which it lost its prominence in 1966. It was the time when America was open to ‘Frankness and Openness.’ In 1968, came the new rating system which we follow till today. The new system was developed not to approve or reject a motion picture. Instead of this, an independent ratings body would advise or warn the parents to let them know if they are suitable for their children. “It’s the parents’ discretion whether to allow them to watch the movie or not.” (Soriano, 2011) Even this system was 100% voluntary. The ratings are done by an independent board comprising of parents who have no past affiliation to the movie business whatsoever. The board will comprise of 8 to 13 parents whose kids fall into the age group of 5-17. “Their job was to simply rate the motion pictures as they believe a majority of American parents would rate it.” (MPAA, 2011) Ratings: A movie is rated by MPAA based on factors such as language, sex, violence, drug usage and certain other themes and situations which they believe would be of significant concern to most parents. The different types of ratings are G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17. ‘G’ stands for ‘General Audience.’ It means that the movie is suitable for all audience groups and it does not contain any aspects that would offend the parents’ view of the movie. ‘PG’ means ‘Parental Guidance Suggested.” It may have unsuitable contents for children and the parents should decide whether to permit their children to watch them. Some of the attributes that contribute to the PG rating are brief smoking, infrequent horror and violence, mild swear words, and etc. (Phoenix, 2011) PG-13 is “Parents Strongly Cautioned.” 13 indicate that they are inappropriate for children under the age of 13. Sex references, explicit languages, drug usage and political theme are the additional inappropriate attributes when compared to PG. (Filmratings.com, 2011) ‘R’ refers to ‘Restricted.’ ‘R’ rated movies often contains adult activity, hard language, intense graphic or tenacious violence, sexually oriented nudity, drug abuse etc. ‘NC-17’ means ‘No One 17 and Under Admitted.’ Inappropriate attributes are sexual nudity, sex scenes, immoral and disgusting behavior and drug abuse. (Fimratings.com 2011) The paper now has discussed the emergence of MPAA, different types of ratings etc. Now the question is how accurate and justified these ratings are. Are there any flaws in today’s rating system? Does MPAA have any biasness towards the major production house and film studios? Can the MPAA be tricked? Is there any relevance for the ‘NC-17’ rating? Analysis Is MPAA biased towards major studios? MPAA had grown by a great deal since its inception in 1968. But does the system show any bias towards major film studios? MPAA has undergone various stages of evolution ever since it was introduced by its then president Jack Valenti. Due to his contributions, Valenti walked the ‘Hall of Fame’ in the coming years. The interesting fact is the personalities who accompanied his during his walk of fame. He was accompanied by the heads of Warner Bros, Universal Studios, Paramount Pictures, Walt Disney Pictures, Sony Pictures and 20TH Century Fox. There were several occasions where MPAA was biased towards major film studios and against struggling independent filmmakers. (Matthew McN, 2008) There is a common perception or argument that the above statement is true, because the major film studios backed movies tend to have a wider audience reach, and a chance for a possible controversy is trivial. While, on the other hand, an indie flick or a low budget movie often contains themes which are darker, grittier and more realistic. Let’s compare two movies to discuss about the above argument, ‘Water for Elephants (2011)’ and ‘Moon (2009)’. ‘Water for Elephants’ was a big budget movie ($38,000,000) released in 2011. It was produced by 3 major production companies, namely, Fox 2000 Pictures, 3 Arts Entertainment, and Flashpoint Entertainment. In spite of having frightening and intense scenes on 7 different occasions, Alcohol usage and cigarette smoking scenes, display of animal cruelty, existence of violence and gore, human slaughter, display of several dead and bloodied bodies, sex and nudity etc., the movie was rated as PG-13. The movie clearly had questionable aspects which could have easily categorized it as R. Still Water for Elephants was a PG-13 film. MPAA might not have been so amused to give an R rating to this movie just because it was produced by Fox Pictures. ‘Moon’ is a small budget motion picture ($5,000,000) released in 2009. It was produced by 3 minor production houses, namely, Liberty Films UK, Xingu Films and Limelight Fund. This movie was rated R on the grounds of portraying intense atmosphere and sense of mystery, hallucinations and general sense of threat. The movie is based on a single man who is to spend a certain amount of time on the surface of the moon alone. All these are important factors which contribute to the theme of the movie. There is no drug or alcohol usage throughout the movie. Little bit of profanity was found in the movie which was portraying the frustration of a lonely man stranded on the moon. The only existence of violence is a small fight between the protagonist and his clone. There is a mild and trivial display of sexual behavior, which was just a mere hallucination of the protagonist. Still, Moon gets rated as R, when movies like Water for Elephants have a PG-13 rating. ‘Rushmore’ is yet another beautiful film released in 1998, which was rated R for showing a boy smoking twice and use of mild profane words. The only violence in this movie was of a boy who fakes to be hit by a car by putting fake blood on his temple. The only sexual gesture is found in the movie is the mere verbal mentioning of a hand job given to a boy. Still this movie gets rated as R. On the other hand, a movie like ‘Moulin Rouge’, released in 2001, which has questionable sexual and nudity display, 14 scenes displaying violence and gore, numerous scenes showing people smoking, alcohol usage and many more intense and frightening scenes, gets a PG-13 rating. There are many more comparisons between high, popular and big budget movies with lesser known independent movies with almost similar contents, with the latter being rated unjustly. But will a harsher rating system be more beneficial in this situation? The answer is a simple ‘NO’. A harsher rating system would induce more damage to independent and small budget films than major studio backed films. Sex over Violence This is a very weird thought process adopted by MPAA. A movie which contains a small aspect of sexuality is at once branded as PG-13, while the violence aspect is convincingly disregarded as a minor immoral content. This aspect has been very blatantly used by certain filmmakers like Martin Scorsese, Quentin Tarantino and Matt Stone to trick MPAA and get a good rating. How else can movies like ‘The Departed’ and ‘Kill Bill’ which are full of violence and gore get away with a R rating when it easily contains contents to be rated as NC-17. (Matthew McN, 2008) Here the bias towards big budget films is not the lone factor, but the preference of sexual content over violence also contributes. Mystery behind NC-17 ‘NC-17’ is MPAA’s most talked about and controversial rating. Filmmakers find it very difficult to generate good audience group for a NC-17 rated movie, because it nullifies an entire age group of audience, as the age group of 17 and below are forbidden to watch it. Such films are often insisted for a re-edit. The issue lies in the existence of a very thin line in MPAA’s differentiation of a NC-17 rating. People still associates a NC-17 to an X rating, which is basically pornography. There has been constant debate over MPAAs rating system over the years. Like the 2 sides of a coin, it has both pros and cons. The major advantage of this system is its very own existence. It is a platform for parents and guardians to be aware of the existence of any objectionable content in any particular movie. However, it has been widely criticized for the way it works, for its biased approach towards big budget films and for its closed attitude towards low budget movies, etc. Nothing can be changed as of now because the MPAA will continue to work as it has been working in the past. We still have a movie like Titanic which is rated as PG-13 in spite of having nudity, offensive language and violence, not to forget, being produced by ‘20TH Century Fox’ and ‘Paramount Pictures’. Conclusion It is really unfortunate that a movie, depending on its budget and production house, have their way out of a harsh rating, while, an independent and low budget movie gets rated very harshly. We wanted a just and incorruptible system for the ratings purpose, instead, we got a biased and unjust system. The comparison between ‘Water for Elephants and Moon’ and ‘Rushmore and Moulin Rouge’ are just a few instances which show the irregularity on the ratings given by MPAA. We can find many other examples by devoting more research in this area. The question is, did ‘Water for Elephants’ and ‘Moulin Rouge’ have their way due to its big budget or the backing of big production house? Did ‘Moon’ and ‘Rushmore’ get rated harshly due to its low budget? The answer is an unfortunate ‘YES’. At the end of the day, you yourself are the judge of everything. No prudish committee or body can match the personal level of maturity. But still, we see a movie like ‘Lost in Translation’ gets rated as R for the display of a meaningless sexual content. References Soriano, R, H.”What are PG Movies.” EHow.com. 22 November 2011. “Safeguarding Artistic Freedom.” Motion Picture Association of America. 22 November 2011 “Ratings System.” Neolaphoenix.com. 22 November 2011. “Welcome.” Fimratings.com. 22 November 2011. MatthewMcN. “MPAA: The Motion Picture Atrocity of America.” 22 November 2011. “The Most Unfairly Rated R Movies.” Moviecritic.com. 23 November 2011. “PG-13 Rating for ‘Water for Elephants.’ Water for Elephants. 23 November 2011. “Water for Elephants.” IMDB.com. 23 November 2011. Read More