This Film is Not Yet Rated was truly enlightening for me. I have always thought that the MPAA Ratings system was a complete waste of time for parents, but having now seen the extent to which those judging these films are NOT accountable for the ratings they give, I feel a strong desire to never see another movie.
Anyone with an open mind and a half a wit knows that violence is rated very generously while sexuality (partiularly homosexual sexuality) is rated very conservatively. An act of Love, even presented as such in a beautiful and optimistic light, is considered more damaging to our children than Uma Thurman chopping up 50 or so people, with arterial fountains spraying blood everywhere?
The ratings board, and particularly the appeals board, I have learned, is influenced strongly by religious leaders and conservative special interest groups. Sex is about love, or at least pleasure, (we’ll get to Rape later…) and is a daily part of most adults’ lives (even some religious conservatives’ lives, though they’d never admit it.) Violence is about fear and hate, and Conservative special interest groups are all about the fear and hate. In my opinion, violence is far more damaging to our children than sexuality. This is why the three categories should be rated separately; because some people disagree with me.
Of course, anyone who knows me knows that I will continue to go see movies, regardless of the flawed nature of the ratings system. So, I will start rating films based on my own system, judging as someone with a modest degree of experience with children, and a modest Degree in a mental health field. These ratings will be designed specifically and with no other purpose than to guide parents in choosing films for their children to see. I will not give an age range for any of these ratings. It is up to parents to see films and see what ratings they are comfortable with their children seeing at what age. I will use other films as precedents.
Films will be rated on the classic three categories: Violence, Sexuality, and Language, each rated on a scale of 1 to 5. As a general rule, though not in all cases, these will be the guidelines for these ratings:
Violence:
1- “Cartoonish” to use the MPAA’s word, or mild to no violence. No blood. NO MURDER. (Yes, I even mean The Good Guy killing all the faceless, nameless Bad Guy Minions.) We’re talking Shrek and Monsters, Inc. here, people.
2- Some blood is okay. “Implied murder,” such as explosions or off-screen gunshots is okay. Good Will Hunting would probably recieve a 2 for violence.
3- Most action films made these days would get this rating. Blood is okay. No Viscera. No mass murder. No Terror (Horror-genre movies would probably recieve a 4 or above consistently with me. I don’t think The Ring was appropriate for a 13 year old, and I would hope most people would agree with me, though the MPAA didn’t.)
4- Minimal viscera. Mass murder okay. Blood in any amount okay. Kill Bill is in this category. Saving Private Ryan is also a 4 in violence. Attempted rape. I can’t think of a situation in which rape would not recieve at least a 4, and it would have to be delicately done.
5- EXTREMELY violent. Viscera, Mass Murder, Body Parts, etc.
Sexuality:
1- Extremely mild to no sexuality. No “naughty bits.”
2- Implied sex is okay, but still no parts. Sexual contact with no nudity is okay. Empire Records might recieve a 2 in Sexuality.
3- Breasts and butt okay, no pubic areas. All sexual positions allowed, within the nudity restrictions. “Sweet sex,” not too raunchy. No group sex. (So call me a prude. Remember, these are the GUIDELINES I will be using, not law.)
4- ALL parts okay, group sex scenes okay. Prolonged 3-rated scenes might make a 4.
5- Go nuts, as long as it has “Artistic value” or some Government asswipe will call it porn.
Language:
1- Nothing that would make you laugh if a 3 year old said it.
2- “Crap” “Hell” “Damn” etc.
3- “Fuck” “Shit” “Ass” etc. Mild Vulgar sexual language.
4- LOTS of “Fuck” “Shit” and “Ass,” most Racial Slurs. Also, very vulgar sexual language.
5- Unreasonable amounts of “Fuck” “Shit” “Ass” and Racial slurs.
Here are some examples of some ratings:
Notting Hill: 1-3-2
Notes: Some sex jokes, reference to pornography, minor British swearwords, no violence.
Van Helsing: 3-1-1
Some violence and scary creature violence, no sexuality, no foul language.
Some ways an event may recieve a rating lower than the above-listed guidelines is if it is short, above the heads of a younger audience, (as in Wallace and Gromit) or used to demonstrate, in an age-appropriate way, why those things are bad. Higher ratings would be if the events are prolonged, extremely pointed, or are exascerbated by one of the other categories. For instance, Someone using a racial slur while killing someone could recieve a higher language rating due to the violence, or a higher violence rating due to the language.
If this system were adopted by the MPAA, I would expect the following changes to their current system:
Mostly Parents of school-age children, teachers, Some child behavior specialists, and, yes, even minimal clergy would be members of the panels. No industry professionals, no conflicts of interest. Although steps would be taken to keep these panel members from being influenced, (attempting to influence a panel member would result in the panel refusing to rate the film in question, for instance, or would result in an alternate, confidential panel to be appointed for that particular film, whose identities, profiles and votes would be revealed AFTER the rating was complete.) their identities and profiles would be made available to the public. Their votes in each category along with short commentary justifying their votes, should they have any, would also be available to the public.
The appeals process would go through another panel, similar to the first. Again, lots of transparency. Debate would be welcomed, precedents could be presented, and the panel would have to justify their ratings to the filmmakers.
Finally, and this is key: The Purpose of the Rating System would remain paramount, which is: This is a rating system for PARENTS to judge what they will allow THEIR CHILDREN to see. If people use it to judge what they wish to watch, that is their choice as adults. Marketing money and backing by a studio should not be contingent on recieving a specific rating. Parents should be responsible for knowing where their children are and what their children are watching, not the theatres. Theatres should not refuse to play a film that recieves a 5.