World Library  
Flag as Inappropriate
Email this Article

MPAA film rating system

Article Id: WHEBN0007790264
Reproduction Date:

Title: MPAA film rating system  
Author: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Language: English
Subject: Parents Music Resource Center, 1968 in film, Xanga, Marvel Rating System, British Columbia Film Classification Office, This Film Is Not Yet Rated, Content rating, Gross out, Promises! Promises!, Kidtoon Films
Collection:
Publisher: World Heritage Encyclopedia
Publication
Date:
 

MPAA film rating system

"PG-13" redirects here. For the wrestling team, see PG-13 (professional wrestling). For the Sharon Needles album, see PG-13 (album).
"R-rated" redirects here. For other uses, see R rating (disambiguation) and Rated R (disambiguation).

The Motion Picture Association of America's film-rating system is used in the U.S. and its territories to rate a film's suitability for certain audiences. The MPAA rating system is a voluntary scheme not enforced by law and films can be exhibited without a rating, though many theaters refuse to exhibit non-rated or NC-17 rated films. Non-members of MPAA may also submit films for rating.[1] Other media (such as television programs and video games) may be rated by other entities. The MPAA rating system is one of various motion picture rating systems used to help parents decide what films are appropriate for their children.

The MPAA's rating system is administered by the Classification & Ratings Administration (CARA), an independent agency.

Ratings

MPAA film ratings

Since the late 1990s, the MPAA film ratings have been as follows:

Rating symbol Meaning
G – General Audiences
All ages admitted. This movie contains nothing that would offend parents for viewing by children.
Such films may contain only mild violence or crude humor, and may have no nudity, sex, drugs or coarse (as distinct from impolite) language. The discrimination/bullying and emotional intensity must be minimal. Alcohol and tobacco may be used in small amounts by adults in the movie, but not by minors, especially in older G-rated films. The violence or horror must be cartoonish in nature or minimal in quantity.
PG – Parental Guidance Suggested
Some material may not be suitable for children. Parents are urged to give parental guidance as the motion picture contains some material that parents might not find suitable for their pre-teenagers.
Such films may contain some violence,infrequent coarse language,crude situations,suggestive material,some rude or unsophisticated behavior, discrimination/bullying, thematic elements,disturbing/startling images, mild horror, action and peril, emotional intensity, drug references, alcohol, tobacco, brief partial or somewhat complete nudity and/or implied or some sexual situations.
PG-13 – Parents Strongly Cautioned
Parents are urged to be cautious as the motion picture contains some material that parents might consider inappropriate for children under 13.
Such films may contain moderate to strong violence, horror, action and peril, strong coarse language, some suggestive material and partial or somewhat complete nudity, strong rude or unsophisticated behavior, discrimination/bullying, alcohol, smoking, intense sexual situations, crude situations, thematic elements, emotional intensity, disturbing/startling images, and/or soft drug use or references.
R – Restricted
People under 17 may only be admitted if accompanied by a parent or guardian. Such films may contain rough and/or persistent violence and suggestive material, hard language, strong horror, action and peril, strong crude sexual content, alcohol, tobacco, thematic elements, hard crude situations, emotional intensity, disturbing/startling images, hard rude or unsophisticated behavior, discrimination/bullying, sexually oriented nudity, and/or hard drug use.
NC-17 – No One 17 & Under Admitted
This film is clearly adult and people under the age of eighteen are not admitted. Such films may contain brutality/pervasive extreme non-stop graphic violence, explicit sexual content, sexual assault, extreme horror, extreme emotional intensity, discrimination/bullying, crude situations, strong graphic non-stop language, disturbing/startling images, strong graphic drug use, alcohol, tobacco and/or aberrational behavior.

Other labels

If a film has not been submitted for rating or is an uncut version of a film that was submitted, the labels Not Rated or Unrated are often used. Uncut/extended versions of films that are labeled "Unrated" also contain warnings saying that the uncut version of the film contains content that differs from the theatrical release and may not be suitable for younger children or minors. When a movie isn't submitted for rating, it means the MPAA is not sure what to rate it, and therefore may have content that is a mix of various ratings. Previews and trailers might also be approved for certain audiences only, but some may be approved for all audiences as well.

If a film has not yet been assigned a final rating, the labels THIS FILM HAS NOT YET BEEN RATED and THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED are used in trailers and TV spots.

History

Replacement of Hays Code

Jack Valenti, who had become president of the MPAA in May 1966, deemed the Hays Code – in place since 1930 and rigorously enforced since 1934 – as out of date and bearing "the odious smell of censorship".[2] Filmmakers were pushing at the boundaries of the Code, and Valenti cited examples such as Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, which had contained the expressions "screw" and "hump the hostess"; and Blow-Up, which was denied Code approval due to nudity, so the MPAA member studio had released it through a subsidiary.[2] He revised the Code to include the "SMA" (Suggested for Mature Audiences) advisory as a stopgap measure. To accommodate "the irresistible force of creators determined to make 'their films'", and to avoid "the possible intrusion of government into the movie arena",[2] he developed a set of advisory ratings which could be applied after a film was completed. On November 1, 1968, the voluntary MPAA film rating system took effect, with three organizations serving as its monitoring and guiding groups: the MPAA, the National Association of Theater Owners (NATO), and the International Film Importers & Distributors of America (IFIDA).[2]

The ratings used from 1968 to 1969 were:[2]

  • Rated G: General Audiences – Suggested for General Audiences (All Ages Admitted)
  • Rated M: Mature Audiences – Suggested for Mature Audiences (Parental Discretion Advised)
  • Rated R: Restricted – Persons Under 16 Not Admitted Unless Accompanied by Parent or Adult Guardian
  • Rated X: Adults Only – Persons Under 18 Will Not Be Admitted

This content classification system originally was to have three ratings with the intention of allowing parents to take their children to any film they chose. However, the National Association of Theater Owners urged the creation of an adults-only category, fearful of possible legal problems in local jurisdictions. The "X" rating was not an MPAA trademark and would not receive the MPAA seal; any producer not submitting a film for MPAA rating could self-apply the "X" rating (or any other symbol or description that was not an MPAA trademark).[2] In 1969, the "G" rating was simplified to "General Audiences – All Ages Admitted."

With the MPAA's introduction of its rating system, the U.S. was a latecomer as far as film classification was concerned. Countries such as Australia and the United Kingdom had begun this practice earlier in the 20th century.[3]

From M to GP to PG

Many parents were confused by the "M" and "R" ratings, thinking that the former was the "sterner" rating.[2] In 1970, "M" was renamed to "GP" (intended to indicate "General audiences, Parental guidance suggested"),[2] then revised in 1972 to "PG".[4][5] In 1971, they added the content advisory "Contains material not generally suitable for pre-teenagers"; in 1978 it was reworded, with pre-teenagers becoming children.[6][7]

In conjunction with these changes, the ages for "R" and "X" were made the same (17), such that the only practical difference was whether children would be admitted if accompanied, or not at all.

The ratings used from 1970 to 1972 were:

  • Rated G: All Ages Admitted - General Audiences
  • Rated GP: All Ages Admitted - Parental Guidance Suggested.
  • Rated R: Restricted - Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
  • Rated X: No One Under 17 Admitted.

The ratings used from 1972 to 1984 were:

  • Rated G: General Audiences – All Ages Admitted.
  • Rated PG: Parental Guidance Suggested – Some Material May Not be Suitable for Pre-Teenagers [1972–1978] / Children [1978–1984].
  • Rated R: Restricted – Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
  • Rated X: No One Under 17 Admitted.

Addition of PG-13 rating

In the early 1980s there were complaints about violence and gore in films such as Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, Poltergeist, Clash of the Titans, and Gremlins which had received a PG rating.[8][9] Steven Spielberg, director of Temple of Doom and executive producer of Gremlins, suggested a new intermediate rating between "PG" and "R".[10] The "PG-13" rating was introduced in July 1984, with the advisory "Parents Are Strongly Cautioned to Give Special Guidance for Attendance of Children Under 13 – Some Material may be Inappropriate for Children Under 13"; in 1986, the wording was simplified.

The ratings used from 1984 to 1990 were:

  • Rated G: General Audiences – All Ages Admitted.
  • Rated PG: Parental Guidance Strongly Suggested – Most Material May Not be Suitable for Children.
  • Rated PG-13: Parents Strongly Cautioned – Some Material May be Inappropriate for Children Under 13.
  • Rated R: Restricted – Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
  • Rated X: No One Under 17 Admitted.

X replaced by NC-17

In the rating system's early years, "X"-rated films such as Midnight Cowboy (1969), A Clockwork Orange (1971), the animated Fritz the Cat (1972), and Last Tango in Paris (1973) were understood to be unsuitable for children, but non-pornographic and intended for the general public. However, pornographic films often self-applied the non-trademarked "X" rating, and it soon became synonymous with pornography in American culture.[11] In late 1989 and early 1990, two critically acclaimed art films featuring strong adult content, Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer and The Cook, the Thief, His Wife & Her Lover, were released. Neither was approved for an MPAA rating, thus limiting their commercial distribution, and prompting criticism of the rating system's lack of a designation for such films.[12][13] In September 1990, the MPAA introduced the rating "NC-17" ("No Children Under 17 Admitted").[14] Henry & June – previously to be assigned an "X" rating – was the first film to receive the "NC-17" rating instead.[14][15] Although films with an "NC17" rating had more mainstream distribution opportunities than "X"-rated films, many cinemas refused to screen them, most entertainment media did not accept advertising for them, and many large video outlets refused to stock them.[16]

The ratings used from 1990 to 1996 were:

  • Rated G: General Audiences – All Ages Admitted.
  • Rated PG: Parental Guidance Suggested – Some Material May Not be Suitable for Children.
  • Rated PG-13: Parents Strongly Cautioned – Some Material May be Inappropriate for Children Under 13.
  • Rated R: Restricted – Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
  • Rated NC-17: No Children Under 17 Admitted.

Current

In 1996,[17] the age limit for "NC-17" films was raised to 18, by rewording it to "No One 17 and Under Admitted".[18]

The ratings used from the late 1990s to this day are:[19]

  • Rated G: General Audiences – All Ages Admitted.
  • Rated PG: Parental Guidance Suggested – Some Material May Not be Suitable for Children.
  • Rated PG-13: Parents Strongly Cautioned – Some Material May be Inappropriate for Children Under 13.
  • Rated R: Restricted – Under 17 Requires Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
  • Rated NC-17: No One 17 and Under Admitted.

Re-released films

Films which are re-released can be resubmitted for a new rating to take advantage of the new categories and changing standards for them. Mainstream films rated "X" during the early years of the system are routinely re-rated "NC-17" (or occasionally "R"). Midnight Cowboy was rated "X" when released in 1969, but re-rated "R" in 1971.[20] A Clockwork Orange was slightly edited, and the film was re-rated "R" in 1972. DVD and Blu-ray versions of the film contain the original "X"-rated version but still retain its "R" rating. Pink Flamingos and Beyond the Valley of the Dolls were re-rated "NC-17" when those films were submitted for re-classification by the MPAA.

Rating explanations

Since September 1990, the MPAA has added brief explanations of why each film received an "R" rating, allowing parents to know what type of content the film contained. For example, some films' explanations may read "Strong Brutal Violence, Pervasive Language, Some Strong Sexual Content, and Drug Material". Around the late 1990s, the MPAA began applying rating explanations for "PG", "PG-13", and "NC-17" films as well.[21]

Advertising materials

The MPAA also rates film trailers, print advertising, posters, and other media used to promote a film. Trailers are commonly referred to as "green band", "yellow band", or "red band" based on the rating given to the trailer by the MPAA. Green, yellow, or red title cards displayed before the start of a trailer indicates the trailer's rating. Prior to May 2013, the bands were printed in Helvetica with drop shadows in all uppercase letters; starting May 2013 the font was changed to Gotham and drop shadows were removed.

  • Green band: approved for all or appropriate audiences; can be shown before a film with any rating. Until 2009, this band read "The following preview has been approved for all audiences by the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc."; in 2009, "all audiences" was changed to "appropriate audiences." In May 2013, in theater previews before a feature film (but not in previews independent of a feature film), the text was changed to "The following preview has been approved to accompany this feature by the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.".
  • Yellow band: approved only for age-appropriate audiences; Internet trailers only.[22]
  • Red band: approved for restricted audiences only; can be shown before R, NC-17 or unrated films, but it cannot be shown in unrated films that are released in theaters with a PG-13 rating. This band reads, "The following preview has been approved for restricted audiences only [or 'mature audiences only'] by the Motion Picture Association of America, Inc.".

Rating components

Violence

  • The violence in a G-rated film must be cartoonish in nature and/or minimal in quantity. If the violence is little more than minimal, it requires a PG rating. If the violence is stronger than mild, it requires a PG-13 rating. If the violence is too rough and persistent, it requires an R rating. If the violence is extreme and exaggerated, it requires an NC-17 rating.

Language

  • G rated films usually can have language beyond polite (i.e. "heck", "rats", "dang", "darn", and "fart"), but never with profanity. PG rated films may have mild profanity (i.e. "ass" and "shit"). PG-13 rated films may contain up to four "harsher sexually derived words". However, if a character in a film says a "harsher sexually derived word" (such as fuck) five or more times, it is routine today for the film to receive an R rating, provided that the word is used as an expletive and not with a sexual meaning (this was mentioned in Be Cool, when Chili Palmer (John Travolta) complains about the film industry). There have been two exceptions noted so far: Gunner Palace, a documentary of soldiers in the Second Gulf War, has 42 uses of the word, 2 used sexually,[23] and The Hip Hop Project has 17 uses.[24] In addition, the word "motherfucker" is apparently not allowed to be used even once in films not rated R, as when it is used, the expletive part is always cut out, usually by a loud sound (e.g., Live Free or Die Hard and Alien vs. Predator). Any explicit and grotesque sexual dialogue will require an NC-17 rating; in some cases, an R rated film will contain some strong sexual dialogue (i.e. The To Do List).

Additionally, some notable PG films contain uses of the word fuck, including Big, Beetlejuice, All the President's Men, The Front, Spaceballs, Sixteen Candles, and Terms of Endearment. The first two were released in 1988, four years after the PG-13 was introduced, whilst the last three were originally rated R for language, but their ratings were overturned on appeal[25]; Spaceballs was released in 1987 three years after the introduction of PG-13.

Drug use

  • A reference to drugs, such as marijuana, usually gets a film a PG-13 rating. An example of an otherwise PG film getting a PG-13 for a drug reference (momentary, along with brief language) is Whale Rider. The film contained only mild profanity but received a PG-13 because of a scene where drug paraphernalia were briefly visible. Critic Roger Ebert criticized the MPAA for the rating and called it "a wild overreaction."[26] Having more illegal drug use and/or abusing drugs as well as onscreen drug overdose, requires an R rating.
  • In May 2007, the MPAA announced that depictions of cigarette smoking would be considered in a film's rating.[27][28]

Usually, if smoking is listed as one of the factors for a film's rating, the DVD and Blu-ray will contain an anti-smoking commercial that plays just before the main menu of the disc itself.

The 2011 Nickelodeon-animated film Rango caused some controversy over its PG rating among anti-smoking advocates. It was argued that the film showed over 60 depictions of characters smoking in the film, and therefore the child-friendly PG was inappropriate.[29]

Sexual content

As of 2010, the MPAA has added a descriptor of "male nudity" to films featuring said content.[30] A brief scene of nudity will require a PG rating. More than a brief nudity will require a PG-13 rating. Sexually oriented (full frontal) nudity will require an R rating. An explicit or violent sex scene, including scenes of rape or sexual assault, will require an NC-17 rating.

Effects of ratings

During the last decade PG ratings have begun to be associated with children's films, and are widely considered to be commercially bad for films targeted at teenagers and adults. For example, the 2004 film Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, which was not targeted at children, received a PG rating, which some believe caused it to underperform at the box office as preteens and teenagers may have brushed it off as a "kiddie flick".[31]

Commercial viability of the NC-17 rating

In its initial years of use, few films with the NC-17 rating were profitable. Today, the NC-17 rating is found primarily in art house films where patrons are less likely to have a positive or negative impression of the rating. During the controversy about the MPAA's decision to give the film Blue Valentine an NC-17 rating (the Weinstein Company challenged this decision, and the MPAA ended up awarding the same cut an R rating on appeal), star Ryan Gosling noted that NC-17 films are not allowed wide advertisement and that, given the refusal of major cinema chains like AMC and Regal to show NC-17s, many such films will never be accessible to people who live in markets that do not have art house theatres.

In 1995, United Artists released the big-budget film Showgirls (1995). It became the most widely distributed film with an NC-17 rating (showing in 1,388 cinemas simultaneously), but a financial failure that grossed only 45% of its $45 million budget.[32] This helped establish the perception that the NC-17 rating was commercially untenable.

When the horror film Scream was submitted, it received an NC-17 rating for its graphic violence. However, Miramax Films, which funded the film, refused to release a film with this rating, so director Wes Craven fought long and hard, making many cuts to attempt to get an R rating. In the end, it took a second showing, with the members having an open mind toward the humorous subject matter, to get the wanted rating. Ironically, when the film was released to video, the version shown was the original, uncut version, though that was fixed in subsequent releases.

Requiem for a Dream (2000) was given an NC-17 rating. When Darren Aronofsky refused to edit the film for an R rating, Artisan Entertainment backed him up by releasing an unrated final cut. An R-rated cut was released later.

Some modest successes can be found among NC-17 theatrical releases, however. Fox Searchlight Pictures released the original NC-17-rated American edition of the European film The Dreamers (2003) in theaters in the United States, and later released both the original NC-17 and the cut R-rated version on DVD. A Fox Searchlight spokesman said the NC-17 rating did not give them much trouble in releasing this film (they had no problem booking it, and only Mormon-owned Deseret News refused to take the film's ad), and Fox Searchlight was satisfied with this film's United States box office result.[33] Another notable exception is Bad Education, a NC-17 foreign-language film which grossed $5.2 million in the United States theatrically[34] (a moderate success for a foreign-language film[35]).

With the growth of the home entertainment market since the late 1990s, a successful marketing vehicle for NC-17 films has emerged. Since R ratings are preferred for theatrical exhibition, filmmakers often cut films to meet the requirements. The "uncut" (either unrated or NC-17) version is sometimes released in limited engagements, other formats (such as DVD or Blu-ray), and in foreign markets. This practice has become commonplace as an enticement to sell the films for home entertainment use.

As of March 2007, according to Variety, MPAA chairman Dan Glickman had been made aware of the attempts to introduce a new rating, or find ways to reduce the stigma of the NC-17 rating. Film studios have pressured the MPAA to retire the NC-17 rating, because of its likely impact on their film's box office revenue.[36][37]

Legal scholar Julie Hilden wrote that the MPAA has a "masterpiece exception" that it has made for films that would ordinarily earn an NC-17 rating, if not for the broader artistic masterpiece that requires the violence depicted as a part of its message. She cites Saving Private Ryan, with its bloody depiction of the D-Day landings, as an example. This exception is troubling, Hilden argues, because it ignores context and perspective in evaluating other films and favors conventional films over edgier films that contribute newer and more interesting points to public discourse about violence.[38]

The 2004 horror film Saw was going to be NC-17, but was rated R (after cuts), as were its subsequent sequels.

Issuance of "R Cards"

Starting in 2004, GKC Theatres (now Carmike Cinemas) had 'R-Cards' that let teens see R-rated films without adult accompaniment. The cards generated much controversy, and Jack Valenti of the MPAA said in a news article: "I think it distorts and ruptures the intent of this voluntary film ratings system. All R-rated films are not alike."[39] The president of the National Association of Theatre Owners, John Fithian, also says that the cards can be harmful. He noted in a news article for the Christian Science Monitor that the R rating is "broad enough to include relatively family-friendly fare such as Billy Elliot and Erin Brockovich (both rated R for language) along with films that push the extremes of violence, including Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill."[40]

Criticisms

Emphasis on sex and language versus violence

The film rating system has had a number of high profile critics. Film critic Roger Ebert argued that the system places too much emphasis on sex while allowing the portrayal of massive amounts of gruesome violence. The uneven emphasis on sex versus violence is echoed by other critics, including David Ansen, as well as many filmmakers. Moreover, Ebert argued that the rating system is geared toward looking at trivial aspects of the film (such as the number of times a profane word is used) rather than at the general theme of the film (for example, if the film realistically depicts the consequences of sex and violence). He 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. He also called for the NC-17 rating to be removed and have the X rating revived. He felt that everyone understood what X-rated means while fewer people understood what NC-17 meant. He called for ratings A and X to identify whether an adult film is pornographic or not.[41][42][43][44]

MPAA chairman Dan Glickman has disputed these claims, stating that far more films are initially rated NC-17 for violence than for sex but that these are later edited by studios to receive an R rating.[45]

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,[46] he documents a prejudice against sex in relation to violence. This Film Is Not Yet Rated also points out that four times as many films received an NC-17 rating for sex rather as they did for violence according to the MPAA's own website.

The 2011 documentary Bully received an R rating for the language contained within the film. The decision spawned controversy, as the rating would prevent most of the intended audience, middle and high schoolers, from seeing the film.[47] 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[48] and a version with less profanity was finally given a PG-13 rating.

Tougher standards for independent studios

Many critics of the MPAA system, especially independent distributors, have charged that major studios' releases often receive more lenient treatment than independent films. They allege that Saving Private Ryan, with its intense depiction of the D-Day invasion of Normandy, would have earned an NC-17 had it not been a Steven Spielberg film. The independent film Saints and Soldiers, which contains no nudity, almost no sex (there is a scene where a German soldier is about to rape a French woman), very little profanity, and a minimum of violence, was said to have been rated R for a single clip where a main character is shot and killed, and required modification of just that one scene to receive a PG-13 rating.[49][50] Eric Watson, producer of the independently-distributed, NC-17-rated Requiem for a Dream complained that the studios are paying the budget of the the MPAA, which gives the studios leverage over the MPAA's decisions.[51]

The comedy Scary Movie, released by Dimension Films, at the time a division of The Walt Disney Company, contained "strong crude sexual humor, language, drug use and violence," including images of ejaculation and an erect penis, but was rated R, to the surprise of many reviewers and audiences; by comparison, the comparatively tame porn spoof Orgazmo, an independent release by South Park creators Matt Stone and Trey Parker, contained "explicit sexual content and dialogue" and received an NC-17 (the only onscreen penis seen is a dildo). As Parker and Stone did not have the money and the time to edit the film, it retained its NC-17 rating. In contrast, Parker and Stone's second feature film, South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut, was distributed by a major studio (Paramount) and, after multiple submissions and notes from the MPAA, received an R rating.[51] Adam Carolla's film The Hammer was given an R rating for brief language which prompted him to question why the MPAA would rate the film R, despite there being one to two instances of "fuck", and other minimal profanities, which is mostly considered PG-13 rated fare. A similar incident occurred with the Oscar winning independent film The King's Speech, which had a rough total of 17 instances of "fuck" used over two brief scenes. The film's subsequent R rating was criticized due to the tame content of the rest of the film, as well as the relative importance to the plot the cursing plays. Eventually, an edited, PG-13 rated version was released, but never released on DVD.

Call for publicizing the standards

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 show that parents find the ratings useful. Critics such as Matt Stone in Kirby Dick's documentary This Film is not Yet Rated respond this proves only that parents find the ratings more useful than nothing at all.[52] In the film it is also discussed how the MPAA will not reveal any information about who or why certain decisions are made. They will not even reveal to the film maker the specific scenes that need to be cut in order to get alternative rating.

Accusation of "ratings creep"

Although there has always been concern about the content of films,[53] the MPAA has, in recent years, been accused of a "ratings creep", whereby the films that fall into today's ratings categories now contain more objectionable material than those that appeared in the same categories two decades earlier.[54] A study put forward by the Harvard School of Public Health in 2004 concluded that there had been a significant increase in the level of profanity, sex and violence in films released between 1992 and 2003.[55] Kimberly Thompson, director of the study, stated: "The findings demonstrate that ratings creep has occurred over the last decade and that today’s movies contain significantly more violence, sex, and profanity on average than movies of the same rating a decade ago."[55]

Questions of relevance

Slashfilm.com managing editor David Chen wrote on the website: "It's time for more people to condemn the MPAA and their outrageous antics. We’re heading towards an age when we don’t need a mommy-like organization to dictate what our delicate sensibilities can and can’t be exposed to. I deeply hope that the MPAA’s irrelevance is imminent." [56] Chicago Tribune film critic Michael Phillips wrote that the MPAA ratings board "has become foolish and irrevelvant [sic], 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."[57]

Alternative systems

The MPAA system is not mandatory for films produced outside the major studios and therefore can be bypassed. In 2010, the Voluntary Media Rating (known as VoMeR for short) system was created by US-based filmmakers who were frustrated with the MPAA system, but still didn't want their films released unrated.[58] The Voluntary Media Rating is a self-rating system for film, music, and new-media producers. The system has three standard labels: "Ev" ("everybody"), "wA < [age]" ("with adult supervision under [age]"), and "Rc < [age]" ("restricted content under [age]"). For example, "wA < 10" indicates that it is suitable for accompanied children under 10, or "Rc < 18" indicates that it is not suitable for anyone under 18. In addition, producers are asked to include "disclosure" notes explaining the reasons for the rating, such as "Supernatural Horror; Brief Sexuality; Intense Violence".[58]

See also

References

External links

  • Vintage MPAA theatrical movie ads at YouTube:
    • 1966 MPAA Julie Andrews "Signs" theater ad (introduces MPAA seal)
    • "What is GMRX?" 1968 MPAA theater ad
    • 1970 MPAA "Symbols" theater ad (explains G, GP, R, and X ratings).
    • 1972 "Charlton Heston on Movie Ratings"
  • Classification and Ratings Administration Official Website with ratings database
  • MPAA Film Ratings website
This article was sourced from Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License; additional terms may apply. World Heritage Encyclopedia content is assembled from numerous content providers, Open Access Publishing, and in compliance with The Fair Access to Science and Technology Research Act (FASTR), Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., Public Library of Science, The Encyclopedia of Life, Open Book Publishers (OBP), PubMed, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information, U.S. National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, and USA.gov, which sources content from all federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government publication portals (.gov, .mil, .edu). Funding for USA.gov and content contributors is made possible from the U.S. Congress, E-Government Act of 2002.
 
Crowd sourced content that is contributed to World Heritage Encyclopedia is peer reviewed and edited by our editorial staff to ensure quality scholarly research articles.
 
By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. World Heritage Encyclopedia™ is a registered trademark of the World Public Library Association, a non-profit organization.
 


Copyright © World Library Foundation. All rights reserved. eBooks from Project Gutenberg are sponsored by the World Library Foundation,
a 501c(4) Member's Support Non-Profit Organization, and is NOT affiliated with any governmental agency or department.