Go Back  DVD Talk Forum > Entertainment Discussions > Movie Talk
Reload this Page >

MPAA to revise their rating system

Movie Talk A Discussion area for everything movie related including films In The Theaters

MPAA to revise their rating system

Old 01-17-07, 10:00 PM
  #1  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 5,610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
MPAA to revise their rating system

From IMDB:

MPAA To Revise Ratings System


The Motion Picture Association of America, always resistant to changes to its movie ratings system under its previous chief, Jack Valenti, is now planning to make some key alterations to the system, Daily Variety reported today (Wednesday). The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult. Another change will allow a filmmaker to cite scenes in another movie when appealing a severe rating. In an interview with Variety Dan Glickman, who succeed Valenti in 2004, said that the organization had been influenced by criticism of its ratings system presented in the documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, which debuted at the Sundance film festival last year. Glickman plans to discuss the new revisions of the ratings rules with independent filmmakers attending this year's Sundance festival, which gets underway on Monday, Variety said.
Old 01-17-07, 10:10 PM
  #2  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Right now, my location is DVDTalk, but then again, you should already know that, shouldn't you?
Posts: 6,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Seantn
The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult.
Wow; so now parents aren't allowed to have the final say in matters pertaining to their own children. Ah, it's so great to live in America, the land of the free...
Old 01-17-07, 10:14 PM
  #3  
Needs to contact an admin about multiple accounts
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 1,411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Doesn't sound like a damn thing will change.
Old 01-17-07, 10:23 PM
  #4  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 350
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
Wow; so now parents aren't allowed to have the final say in matters pertaining to their own children. Ah, it's so great to live in America, the land of the free...
I think you're misinterpreting it. It seems that it's simply a recommendation for parents. Maybe this will allow for movies that would previously be rated NC-17 to be given an R with a qualifier.
Old 01-17-07, 10:42 PM
  #5  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Numanoid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Down in 'The Park'
Posts: 27,882
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Hopefully it means that there will be a new rating between R and NC-17:

R+ (We Mean It, Get a Fucking Babysitter)

Last edited by Numanoid; 01-18-07 at 12:19 AM.
Old 01-17-07, 11:21 PM
  #6  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Lower Beaver, Iowa
Posts: 10,522
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
Wow; so now parents aren't allowed to have the final say in matters pertaining to their own children. Ah, it's so great to live in America, the land of the free...
You don't have to go to many R-rated movies for proof that some parents are either incapable of or unwilling to make good decisions when it comes to raising their children.

That said, I don't know what you were reading, but the story says nothing to indicate parents don't have the final say. It simply says the revamped ratings will warn parents more strongly.

In fact, the MPAA has never governed what parents can and can't do. It has always been up to the theaters to "enforce" the ratings.
Old 01-17-07, 11:33 PM
  #7  
Banned by request
 
Supermallet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Termite Terrace
Posts: 54,156
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I like the appeals system. The other thing about the warning doesn't mean dick.
Old 01-17-07, 11:43 PM
  #8  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 39,465
Received 30 Likes on 26 Posts
to the appeals change, when I heard "no citing" in This Film Is Not Yet Rated I was actually somewhat dumbfounded.

Also, the R rating needs some minor revision, RESTRICTED isn't exactly descriptive to a lot of the, erm, parents out there. "This film is not suitable for children under 17" is more fitting.
Old 01-18-07, 12:42 AM
  #9  
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Oklahoma, USA
Posts: 8,494
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
Wow; so now parents aren't allowed to have the final say in matters pertaining to their own children. Ah, it's so great to live in America, the land of the free...
Land where you're free to watch an adult movie without a lot of 5 year olds running amok. That does sound like a great place to live.
Old 01-18-07, 01:09 AM
  #10  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Drexl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 16,020
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
I don't get it. How are they not warning them now? They added the content descriptors.
Old 01-18-07, 01:17 AM
  #11  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I've been hearing audio disclaimers on some trailers now.
Old 01-18-07, 02:18 AM
  #12  
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: San Leandro/San Francisco
Posts: 7,422
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So they will still probably let violence be acceptable and sex sheltered.
Old 01-18-07, 04:58 AM
  #13  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Next stop, Earth.
Posts: 3,262
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Personally I don't think kids should be allowed into R rated movies period, whether the parents want them there or not. It's pretty damn irresponsible, as well as inconsiderate to the other theatergoers. Get a babysitter or stay home!
Old 01-18-07, 08:56 AM
  #14  
DVD Talk Legend
 
matome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: NY
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Numanoid
Hopefully it means that there will be a new rating between R and NC-17:

R+ (We Mean It, Get a Fucking Babysitter)
Old 01-18-07, 09:30 AM
  #15  
DVD Talk Hero
 
Josh-da-man's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Bible Belt
Posts: 31,862
Received 35 Likes on 27 Posts
Just do away with the fucking ratings system.

With cable TV and home video, it's completely pointless to have the NC-17 rating that bars anyone under the age of 17 from the theater when they can watch the same thing on cable TV or on a DVD with or without their parent's consent.

The whole G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 thing is just completely pointless these days, and it sucks because it's become little more a big marketing gimmick when the studios try to shoot for a certain rating (mostly PG-13). And the whole "UNRATED EDITION" thing has gotten out of hand as well.

Just release the goddamned movies the way they were supposed to be released. Get rid of the whole censorship ratings board and just let the studios put on content warnings as they see fit.

When you have a theatrical window of only a couple of weeks, and then DVDs that last forever, it's ridiculous to have these ratings that cater to movie theaters.
Old 01-18-07, 09:41 AM
  #16  
Moderator
 
Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 33,514
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by Josh-da-man
Just do away with the fucking ratings system.

With cable TV and home video, it's completely pointless to have the NC-17 rating that bars anyone under the age of 17 from the theater when they can watch the same thing on cable TV or on a DVD with or without their parent's consent.

The whole G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 thing is just completely pointless these days, and it sucks because it's become little more a big marketing gimmick when the studios try to shoot for a certain rating (mostly PG-13). And the whole "UNRATED EDITION" thing has gotten out of hand as well.

Just release the goddamned movies the way they were supposed to be released. Get rid of the whole censorship ratings board and just let the studios put on content warnings as they see fit.

When you have a theatrical window of only a couple of weeks, and then DVDs that last forever, it's ridiculous to have these ratings that cater to movie theaters.

that's wishful thinking. At this point, the MPAA wields too much power, and there's nothing anyone can really do about it. The MPAA decides on alot of things other than just assigning a film it's rating. Trailers and advertising also fall under MPAA approval. At one point, some theatre chains, newspapers and even Target, Walmart wouldn't show/advertise/stock a movie if it didn't have a MPAA rating - thankfully this has lessened. But on the whole, what has to change, are the actual raters of the films and hypocrisity on subject, visual depiction. The MPAA are prudes when it comes to sex, graphic violence is okay, but sex/nudity: no. The appeals process must also be less strict and annonymous and cost effective to the studio/distributor.
Old 01-18-07, 09:47 AM
  #17  
Moderator
 
Giles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Washington DC
Posts: 33,514
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by RichC2
to the appeals change, when I heard "no citing" in This Film Is Not Yet Rated I was actually somewhat dumbfounded.

Also, the R rating needs some minor revision, RESTRICTED isn't exactly descriptive to a lot of the, erm, parents out there. "This film is not suitable for children under 17" is more fitting.
I agree NC-17 should just become R (restricted] and previous R's should just be PG-16's, that would wake up America if and when those previousily NC-17 rated movies pop up and parent's and shocked to see hardcore sex and explicit violence, the retort: "ah... it is a restricted movie'
Old 01-18-07, 11:06 AM
  #18  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Right now, my location is DVDTalk, but then again, you should already know that, shouldn't you?
Posts: 6,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Joe Molotov
Land where you're free to watch an adult movie without a lot of 5 year olds running amok. That does sound like a great place to live.
Originally Posted by Mr. Salty
You don't have to go to many R-rated movies for proof that some parents are either incapable of or unwilling to make good decisions when it comes to raising their children.
I would urge caution before we are so quick to dismiss our freedoms out of hand, even the unpleasant ones. For instance, most people despise the KKK and everything they stand for, but in a land of the alleged free, are we not compelled to support, even defend, their right to free speech? Is it not key to a free society that everyone's perspective be allowed? Sure, it's easy to throw out freedoms that you don't benefit from directly, but next time, who's to say someone who doesn't profit from a freedom of yours won't work to throw it out? It seems with each passing year of my life, I see more freedoms taken away from American citizens and less new ones provided in exchange. Sometimes (though I recognize we're millions of miles beyond most countries) it seems like the line "land of the free" is little more than marketing hype. Personally, I'll deal with a million fucked up parents making bad choices than Big Brother thinking He's got the Master Plan for all of us as parents.

Originally Posted by Mr. Salty
That said, I don't know what you were reading, but the story says nothing to indicate parents don't have the final say. It simply says the revamped ratings will warn parents more strongly.

In fact, the MPAA has never governed what parents can and can't do. It has always been up to the theaters to "enforce" the ratings.
The latter point is immaterial; we all know if theatres do not support MPAA guidelines, they stand to be penalized. The former point could be my error in reading comprehension but, to me, to state we now have a rating of "not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult" pretty clearly indicates that under 17 will not be allowed whether there's a parent or not (in effect, it would replace NC-17 or exist alongside it as the exact same thing, but with a different name, perhaps in an attempt to block youth attendance from twice as many movies as now). If it doesn't, and I'm misreading it, then this represents a difference which makes no difference and is, therefore, no difference. Attendance with either R-rating would/could be identical.
Old 01-18-07, 11:11 AM
  #19  
Moderator
 
Groucho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Posts: 70,931
Received 14 Likes on 9 Posts
"The trade paper said that the MPAA will now warn parents that some R-rated movies are not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult."

Key word: warn.

And if you're really determined to show your kids I Spit on your Grave or similar, you can always wait and rent it on DVD.
Old 01-18-07, 11:13 AM
  #20  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
antennaball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The 7-8-Triple6, Texas
Posts: 3,622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
The former point could be my error in reading comprehension but, to me, to state we now have a rating of "not suitable for younger people -- whether or not they are accompanied by an adult" pretty clearly indicates that under 17 will not be allowed whether there's a parent or not (in effect, it would replace NC-17 or exist alongside it as the exact same thing, but with a different name, perhaps in an attempt to block youth attendance from twice as many movies as now). If it doesn't, and I'm misreading it, then this represents a difference which makes no difference and is, therefore, no difference. Attendance with either R-rating would/could be identical.
I don't think it clearly indicates that whatsoever. It sounds to me like it's going to be something as innocuous as a voiceover along the lines of "this film may not be suitable for anyone under the age of 17". There's a huge difference between a "warning" and a "restriction".
Old 01-18-07, 11:54 AM
  #21  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Right now, my location is DVDTalk, but then again, you should already know that, shouldn't you?
Posts: 6,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Fair enough, but from a ratings perspective, I fail to see what the quantitative or qualitative difference is between a movie unsuitable for 17 and under unless you are accompanied by an adult and one that is unsuitable for 17 and under whether you are accompanied by an adult or not. More critically, I see zero, zilch, nada difference between this new version of the R-rating and the curent NC-17 rating, so what's it meant to accomplish?
Old 01-18-07, 12:14 PM
  #22  
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
 
antennaball's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: The 7-8-Triple6, Texas
Posts: 3,622
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
More critically, I see zero, zilch, nada difference between this new version of the R-rating and the curent NC-17 rating, so what's it meant to accomplish?
I think the difference is children under 17 can still be admitted to the new R-rated movies when accompanied by a parent. NC-17 means no children, with or without parent.
Old 01-18-07, 12:17 PM
  #23  
DVD Talk Legend
 
Shannon Nutt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 17,112
Received 24 Likes on 22 Posts
Originally Posted by Filmmaker
More critically, I see zero, zilch, nada difference between this new version of the R-rating and the curent NC-17 rating, so what's it meant to accomplish?
Most of America's movie theater chains won't carry NC-17 movies because of the stigma attached to them...this would be a way to get those movies into those theaters.
Old 01-18-07, 12:36 PM
  #24  
DVD Talk Legend
 
FantasticVSDoom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: No longer trapped
Posts: 11,610
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by porieux
Personally I don't think kids should be allowed into R rated movies period, whether the parents want them there or not. It's pretty damn irresponsible, as well as inconsiderate to the other theatergoers. Get a babysitter or stay home!
Well, I feel kids shouldnt be allowed in any movies, but thats a whole other argument waiting to happen ...
Old 01-18-07, 12:49 PM
  #25  
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Right now, my location is DVDTalk, but then again, you should already know that, shouldn't you?
Posts: 6,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by antennaball
I think the difference is children under 17 can still be admitted to the new R-rated movies when accompanied by a parent.
That's already true of rated-R films; what's the damn difference? Why does this new rated-R need to exist?

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.