is the movie rating system effective?

Answer 1

The movie rating system has had a number of high profile critics. Film critic Roger Ebert argues that the system places too much emphasis on not showing sex while allowing the portrayal of massive amounts of gruesome violence. Moreover, he argues that the rating system is geared toward looking at trivial aspects of the movie (such as the number of times a profane word is used) rather than at the general theme of the movie (for example, if the movie realistically depicts the consequences of sex and violence). He has called for an A (adults only) rating, to indicate films high in violence or mature content that should not be marketed to teenagers, but do not have NC-17 levels of sex.

Perhaps with these objections in mind, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office for Film and Broadcasting (a descendent of the formerly influential National Legion of Decency) maintains its own film classification system, which takes the overall "moral tone" of a film into account, rather than focusing on content alone.

Many critics of the MPAA system, especially independent distributors, have charged that major studios' releases often receive more lenient treatment than independent films. It is widely assumed that Saving Private Ryan, with its intense depiction of the D-Day invasion of Normandy, would have earned an NC-17 if it were not a Steven Spielberg film. The comedy Scary Movie, released by a division of The Walt Disney Company's Miramax Films, contained "strong crude sexual humor, language, drug use and violence" but was rated R, to the surprise of many reviewers and audiences; by comparison, the comparatively tame porn spoof Orgazmo, an independent release, contained "explicit sexual content and dialogue" and received an NC-17. On the other hand, the independently distributed film The Passion of the Christ received an R rating despite graphic depictions of violence.

Before its purchase by Disney, Miramax heads Bob and Harvey Weinstein often clashed with the MPAA, proclaimed the rating system unfair to independents, and released some films unrated to avoid an X or NC-17. Orgazmo director Trey Parker's ratings battles later inspired the (R-rated) film South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut, which directly criticized the MPAA and holds the Guinness world record for most profanity and violence in an animated feature (399 profane words, 128 offensive gestures and 221 acts of violence).

Another criticism of the ratings system is the apparent arbitrariness in designating PG-13 and R rated content. Many critics (professional, the general public and religious and moral groups) believe that the content of recent PG-13 films equals that of R-rated films from the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s. For example, depictions of sexual content, violence, profanity and other objectionable content in a PG-13 film from the late 1990s on may have been considered "R level" in the 1970s and 1980s. Critics of film content seem to want that standard to continue despite shifting cultural norms about what is socially acceptable. These critics make the case that instead of the film industry simply reflecting societal values, the movie industry is in fact instrumental in desensitizing society to previously offensive content.

Some other problems include odd ratings for movies. For example, most horror films that do not contain extreme graphic violence can get a PG-13 rating, whereas Kung Fu Hustle, an action-comedy movie with unrealistic, "animated" violence and minimal coarse language in the Cantonese version with English subtitles, gained an R rating, although the PG-13 rated movies are generally more realistically graphic.

Other critics have argued that the sexual (and to a lesser extent, drug and profanity) standards for movie ratings are ideologically biased in favor of socially conservative values. They generally advocate allowing more slack in such categories as nudity and four-letter words, while maintaining the current rules for violence ratings.

Many critics of the system, both conservative and liberal, would like to see the MPAA ratings unveiled and the standards made public. The MPAA has consistently cited Nationwide scientific polls, (conducted each year by the Opinion Research Corporation of Princeton, New Jersey) which demonstrate that parents find the ratings useful. Nevertheless, critics respond that this is the only source of information available.

Answer 2

No. If there was enforcement, i.e. being carded for movies it would be a better system. Since it seems that the R rating is becoming taboo and therefore the out thing, it seems to me that PG-13 is just becoming edgier and baseless. I can see a trailer for a movie and it will look interesting, or whatever, until I see it's PG-13. At which time I know it will suck because the movie studio wants to draw in a "bigger audience" and water down the content, or pay off someone to push the limits and make it rated R but labeled PG-13.

Answer 3

I think it would be if people actually paid attention to it. I've gone to so many PG-13 and R rated movies and seen parents in there with kids who could barely be in their teens - and usually the kids end up crying by the end of the movie, if it's a particularly loud or violent one. And, for instance, when I went to see "Return of the King" (PG-13), some moron comes in and plunks down three little boys, none of whom could have been older than 5 or 6, right beside me! That was a 3 & 1/2 hour movie with a LOT of bloodshed! By the first hour, they were all squirming around and couldn't sit still. By the end, they were all crying.

I think the MPAA does the best it can to screen and warn people as to the content of films, but people just don't pay attention or don't care.

Answer 4

Macbook