Content deleted Content added
m Updated short description Tags: Reverted Mobile edit Mobile app edit iOS app edit App description change |
Betty Logan (talk | contribs) →Questions of relevance: Use alternative title to avoid appearance of a spelling error. |
||
| (6 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
{{Short description|American film rating system
{{Use mdy dates|date=October 2018}}
{{Use American English|date=October 2023}}
Line 227:
Despite this, an internal critic of the early workings of the ratings system is film critic and writer Stephen Farber, who was a CARA intern for six months during 1969 and 1970. In ''The Movie Ratings Game'',<ref name="Farber1972">{{cite book | first = Stephen |last = Farber |url = https://archive.org/details/movieratinggame00farb | url-access = registration |title = The Movie Rating Game |edition = Paperback | publisher = Public Affairs Press |year = 1972 |access-date = October 3, 2011 | isbn =978-0-8183-0181-0}}</ref> he documents a prejudice against sex in relation to violence. The 2006 documentary ''[[This Film Is Not Yet Rated]]'' also points out that four times as many films received an NC-17 rating for sex as they did for violence according to the MPAA's own website, further mentioning a bias against homosexual content compared to heterosexual content, particularly with regards to sex scenes. Filmmaker [[Darren Stein]] further insists that his tame teen comedy ''[[G.B.F. (film)|G.B.F.]]'', which features multiple same-sex kisses but no intercourse, strong language, violence, or nudity, was "rated R for being gay."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://gawker.com/g-b-f-was-rated-r-for-being-gay-1485807841|title=G.B.F. Was Rated R for Being Gay|author=Rich Juzwiak|publisher=Gawker.com|date=December 18, 2013|access-date=December 20, 2013}}</ref>
The 2011 documentary ''[[Bully (2011 film)|Bully]]'' received an R rating for the profanity contained within the film, which prevented most of the intended audience, [[Middle school|middle]] and [[High school (North America)|high school]]ers, from seeing the film. The film's director, Lee Hirsch, has refused to recut the film, stating, "I feel a responsibility as a filmmaker, as the person entrusted to tell (these kids') stories, to not water them down." A petition collected more than 200,000 signatures to change the film's rating<ref>{{cite web|title=Teenager petitions to change R rating for 'Bully'|url=https://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57393162/teenager-petitions-to-change-r-rating-for-bully/|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131103210108/http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-505245_162-57393162/teenager-petitions-to-change-r-rating-for-bully/|url-status=dead|archive-date=November 3, 2013|work=CBS News|publisher=CBS|access-date=August 20, 2012|author=Sandy Cohen|date=March 8, 2012}}</ref> and a version with less profanity was finally given a PG-13 rating. The same, however, could not be said about the 1995 teen drama ''[[Kids (film)|Kids]]'', which director [[Larry Clark]] wanted rated R so parents could take their kids to it for educational purposes, but the MPAA rated it NC-17 due to its content of teen sex and turned down Clark's appeal. The film was then released unrated by [[Miramax]] (under Shining Excalibur Films because Miramax, formerly owned by [[The Walt Disney Company|Disney]], hesitated to release it as an NC-17 film).{{Citation needed|date=October 2023}}
=== Inconsistent standards for independent studios ===
Line 247:
=== Questions of relevance ===
''[[
''[[Chicago Tribune]]'' film critic Michael Phillips wrote that the MPAA ratings board "has become foolish and irrelevant, and its members do not have my interests at heart, or yours. They're too easy on violence yet bizarrely reactionary when it comes to nudity and language."<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/ct-xpm-2010-11-04-chi-talking-pictures-1105-story.html|title=There's a word for the MPAA...|last=Phillips|first=Michael|date=November 4, 2010|work=Chicago Tribune|access-date=February 8, 2012}}</ref>
| |||