This Film Is Not Yet Rated
I won’t bore you any more with my opinions on the current MPAA ratings system. If you are interested, you can read the following:
Kirby Dick‘s new documentary, This Film Is Not Yet Rated, tackles the issues surrounding the MPAA ratings system head-on, laying out how films are handled differently depending on whether their content is sexual or violent and whether or not the film comes from an independent or one of the major studios.
Make no mistake, this film makes no pretense of objectivity. Kirby Dick has a major axe to grind with the MPAA and its ratings board, but to his credit, this film makes it case with earnestness and humor, rather than shrillness and bombast. In short, he takes the best tendencies of Michael Moore, while discarding the worst. We hear from numerous filmmakers whose films have been subject to capricious or incomprehensible decisions by the ratings board, clearly showing the onus that they place on sex compared to violence. For example, the film American Psycho initially received an NC-17, not for the copious amounts of graphic violence but for an explicit three-way sex scene.
The film’s other tack concern Kirby’s outrage over the secrecy surrounding the MPAA ratings board. To that end, his puts a team of private investigators on task of learning the identities of the board members. What they uncover is eye-opening. The board is not the cross section of American parents that Jack Valenti likes to claim they are, but a chummy, close-knit group of friends. In fact, almost all of Valenti’s platitudes about the role of the MPAA are held up against the facts and found to be hollow and false.
To cap it off, Dick submits a cut of the film to the MPAA for a rating, which rather predictably receives an NC-17 for the numerous explicit excerpts from other films. Through his eyes, we get a look at the rather opaque and incomprehensible appeal process. Again, the filmmaker finds a veil of secrecy surrounding the group that will be judging his appeal. Once again, he sends the private investigators off to discover their identities. What he finds is even more surprising that what he discovered about the ratings board. The appeals board is comprised of a group of executives, mostly from the movie theater chains. Since they could easily base their decision on the commercial value of the films they want playing in their multiplexes, this presents a real conflict of interest.
To my mind, the biggest problem that Dick finds with the entire ratings process is the fact that there are no clear, objective standards for the ratings board to follow about what constitutes an “R” rating versus what is an NC-17. Since are no rules, it’s almost impossible for the ratings board to be wrong about anything, making the appeals process a fool’s errand for most filmmakers. If they can’t point to a standard that the ratings board didn’t follow, how do they make their case that the rating they received is inappropriate.
The film is not flawless, spending too much time following the private investigators on their long, plodding trail of the rating board members. I think Dick was interested in rubbing the MPAA’s face in his ability to uncover of their closely guarded secret. It wasn’t necessary but it doesn’t detract too much from the film’s extremely valuable and well-argued point.
Title: This Film Is Not Yet Rated
Director: Kirby Dick
Production/Distribution: BBC, Chain Camera Pictures, Independent Film Channel (IFC), NetFlix, Red Envelope Entertainment
Released: 2006
Running Time: One hour, thirty-seven minutes.
MPAA Rating: Unrated
Genres: Documentary
Keywords: Independent, Motion Picture Association of America, MPAA, NC17, Ratings System
About the author:
Paul once shot an elephant in his pajamas. You know the rest.
