I have never understood the movie rating system. I don’t understand the criteria that the board uses to rate a film. It doesn’t appear to be consistent or in the best interest of those that it is meant to protect.
I bring up this topic because it’s in the media a lot right now because of two movies: Bully and The Hunger Games. Bully, a movie about kids being bullied, has been given an R rating by the board due to language. Full disclosure: I haven’t seen Bully yet so I can’t talk specifics. I have, however, seen the Academy Award Winning film, The King’s Speech, which was also rated R for language. The King dropped one too many F words for the board’s liking.
The Hunger Games, a movie about kids forced to fight each other to the death, has been given a PG-13 rating. This doesn’t make sense to me. How can language be worse than violence?
Here is what is posted on the Motion Picture Association of America’s website :
“PG-13 — Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13. A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous. “
“There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence.”
In The Hunger Games, 24 kids from about 12-17 years of age are forced to compete in a live televised fight to the death. Is this realistic? Thankfully, no. However it is real in the fact that these are normal kids fighting. They are not mutants, vampires, werewolves, zombies or anything else not human. Is the violence extreme? Well, define extreme. One kid is beaten to death with a brick. One gets shot by an arrow. One is killed by a sword. All by the hands of another kid. Is it persistent? Most of the movie is about these kids in this battle. In all fairness, the film does not go into too much graphic detail of the deaths and it does do a lot of cut away shots as to not focus on the act itself. But it still happens.
” A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. “
In The King’s Speech, King George VI lets out a few expletives in frustration. He’s not yelling them at anyone in particular. Also, these particular words don’t make him stutter.
Now between The King’s Speech and The Hunger Games, which one should be rated PG-13 and which one should be R? Should they both have the same rating? Which one would you let a teenager see? Which one would be ok to show in schools?
These last points are some of the driving forces behind the push to get the R rating for Bully over turned. Because the MPAA has given Bully an R rating, teenagers cannot see this movie without an adult and the film can’t be shown in schools.
If you are looking at content, wouldn’t it make sense to make a film available to teens that is about real issues that they face today? Bully is a documentary. It’s not scripted. If the teens in the movie are using inappropriate language, perhaps it is because this is the way that teens talk today. Slapping Bully with an R is doing more damage than good. What the MPAA is saying to teens is that they need to be protected from hearing bad language, even though the language is coming from teenage mouths and teens have all heard the words before. And apparently, it is ok to see a film filled with violence because teens don’t need to be protected from that. In a perfect world, what the MPAA should be saying is bulling is wrong and has consequences and everyone should see this film and talk about it so that we can put an end to bulling. They should also be revamping their criteria for rating films and come up with a better way of protecting and educating kids.
If you would like to sign a petition to help over turn the R rating for Bully, click here
For more information on the MPAA rating system, click here
For more information on Bully challenging the MPAA, click here
No comments:
Post a Comment