The Best Rating System is…
-
Projectionist_mok817 — 15 years ago(February 17, 2011 02:08 AM)
yeah that would be nice to follow but according to America the MPAA works and runs just like the government.
WE HAVE NO RIGHTS
we have way of controlling what we can or can not do.
I strongly believe that we have the option to choose what we should let our kids or our self's watch but just like everything in the world we don't have that right unless somebody approves for us.
"Life itself is only a vision, a dream, nothing exists but an empty space" -
berrorg — 15 years ago(February 26, 2011 08:48 AM)
I would go ahead and venture to say that there is NO good rating system, period. I have kids and they can watch whatever they want, as long as I KNOW that they're watching it (and I watch it myself as well - so this may be similar to the OP's view).
My reasoning behind this is that if there is a movie they want to watch and I say NO to it, they will watch it anyway. Hell! If they were just curious about watching that movie, they will be salivating to watch it after I say NO to them. So what would be better? To "forbid" them to watch it when I know for sure that they will watch it anyway (their friends have computers and tv's too), or let them know that I trust them to let me know when they want to watch something, and be there if questions arise after watching a film (sex or violence related questions).
Obviously, porn doesn't apply to this because neither they will tell me that they're watching it, nor will I sit down with them and enjoy a good porn flick with them. But I guess no system is perfect.
BTW.. how do I know this? Experience: I was also a kid, and I was told not to watch some movies, and I watched them anyway. -
DisturbedPixie — 14 years ago(February 29, 2012 02:52 PM)
personally I was amused when I was a young girl that my mom could think one movie was so wrong but another was okay. When i would eventually watch the movie she told me not to watch, it was so tame compared to the crap she let me watch instead. If you are going to tell your kids no, at least come to imdb and find out for yourself with the parental guide section, maybe do the same things with all movies they watch.
of course, I think generally G rated and even PG rated films are okay for most kids, watching them by themselves, BUT I think PG 13 films and R rated film can often be so terribly rated, that the MPAA should be shut down. To compare some movie with a few violent images and curse words like "Speed", and R rated film to the film "Hostel" or "The Hills Have Eyes"(remake) is just wrong. That's so beyond what is fair and decent to do to films and their audiences. And to make independent films guess how to lower their rating, while big budget films get helped like an after school study program.
It's a monopoly of information control. I'd rather choose films like how the OP suggested by watching them all myself then to allow the MPAA to keep doing this. -
mattiasflgrtll6 — 12 years ago(September 03, 2013 01:48 PM)
I think Sweden has a pretty good rating system. Sex (unless it's rape or well, A Serbian Film) and language are often not that discussed about, but a movie has a higher chance of getting an 11 or 15-rating (we never have 18 here) if it depicts people doing drugs or very disturbing violence.
Our other ratings are 7 and Barntillten (For All). -
WileyDairyGnome — 15 years ago(February 26, 2011 04:48 PM)
Ratings mean absolutely nothing. I saw PG-13 movies alone all the time when I was 11/12although "technically" I should have been 13/and or watching it with my mom/dad. I also went to see R-rated movies with my friends when I was about 14-16. Some theaters checked id, some didn't. My mom has never restricted me from watching a movie (if I was too young to understand all of the content, she would watch it with me). I don't pay much attention to ratings. Although, if a movie is rated R I expect it to be better than one that is rated PG-13.
I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been -
m-slovak79 — 14 years ago(May 21, 2011 06:39 AM)
Although, if a movie is rated R I expect it to be better than one that is rated PG-13.
Ill disagree there, especially about the 'expect' part.
because going from PG to PG-13 there is definitely a bigger quality boost on average than going from PG-13 to R (especially because PG is REALLY limiting on what can be shown where as PG-13 is closer to R than it is PG in general which is much less restrictions). hence, as long as you got at least a PG-13 rating you typically don't have to worry about it.
so my basic point is as long as a film is PG-13 or R, then you don't really have to worry to much about the overall quality of film.
p.s. i am not saying there is no quality 'PG Rated' films out there but finding those are MUCH fewer and further between vs PG-13/R which is a lot more common to find good films. because most PG Rated films are mostly kids movies for the most part as it's hard to find a PG Rated film that can hold up against some of the better PG-13/R films, but they are out there
My Vote History
http://imdb.to/b5rrNh -
Moo2400 — 14 years ago(August 30, 2011 07:39 PM)
Not true. I made a database of movies I own and their information I collected, two of many variables being their IMDB rating and MPAA rating. Here's what I found:
Out of the 2126 movies I have in there (and they're mostly very common Hollywood movies, mostly of the last two or three decades), 198 are unrated, 57 are rated G, 289 are PG, 583 are PG-13, 987 are R, and 12 are NC-17 or X. The average IMDB rating in the collection is 7.13 and median is 7.1. When I break it down to MPAA ratings, I'll leave out the average and median IMDB results for G, NC-17 / X, and unrated films.
For PG rated movies, the average IMDB rating is 7.07. The median is 7.1.
For PG-13 rated movies, the average is 6.84. The median is 6.8.
For R rated movies, the average is 7.15. The median is 7.2.
Clearly, PG-13 movies tend to be worse than PG or R rated movies. This is likely because PG-13 movies usually contain watered down R rated content. Indeed, this is quite apparent to most any teenager wanting to see an R rated film but is stuck watching a PG-13 film instead. R rated films tend to have a lot more freedom in their content than PG-13 films do, which is not only why there's a lot more R rated films, but also that they tend to be quite a bit better. PG-13 films simply can't do that, as much as they often try. PG films don't do this, and because PG films go their own way rather than trying to be a watered down version of PG-13 films, PG films tend to do a lot better on the whole. -
pjwoodall1 — 14 years ago(January 24, 2012 05:17 AM)
When I worked for a theater years ago I took the R rating very serious. When we had True Lies two teenage girl showed up with tickets and I told them I had to have their parents' permission. If the parents said they could go see the movie that was ok by me.
One of them called her mother and came back to say her mother said she could see the movie. That's fine but I still have to have her permission. Half an hour later here comes the mother who turned out to be a friend of mine. "No, they don't have my permission."
Then there was the couple who wanted to take their 7 year old son to the NC-17 Kids and couldn't understand why I said no.
As noted elsewhere I agree with Garson Kanin about the old days under the Production Code when filmmakers were forced to be more creative in getting around the censor. -
CompuLOL — 12 years ago(October 07, 2013 04:18 AM)
You must be really proud of yourself
Sadly, it must be the only way you feel good about yourself Not only did you align yourself with the evil censorship system, under the silly excuse of doing your job. But insulted these poor people intelligence; or at least, put into question their parental skills and good judgement. Yet also denied rightful entry without solid grounds. Especially as there is no biding law between final user and theaters either. Making you in effect not only the aforementioned, but a foolish discriminatory donkey's behind. I hope they sued; or at the very least; complained about your ridiculous anal attitude, or that they never returned to that gawd awful place; ever. For there are lot of other locales that are not so self-righteously BS driven -
turock — 15 years ago(April 03, 2011 10:28 PM)
Your rating system works fine for some BUT some families dont have the same time availability you and yours have.
Some families have both parents working either opposite shifts, or both parents working 2 jobs to pay bills. Which means just getting a day when everyone can actually be together to go see a movie can be very tough.
Add to that the fact that the average ticket price is hovering around 8-10 dollars a ticket at the multi-plexe's, less if its a locally run theater. Not everyone has the extra 20 bucks or the extra time to PRE-view a film before hand.
That being said I think our ratings system needs to be re evaluated as they are way off the mark on many aspects.
This message has been deleted by an administrator. -
danilkak — 14 years ago(April 30, 2011 10:32 PM)
I think IMDB is great for that, even though I'm not a parent myself, I use IMDB to see if a movie will be offensive to my parents. But yeah, you can just click on parental guide, and see all the possibly offensive material that a movie has.
-
Dan_117 — 14 years ago(May 05, 2011 02:55 AM)
The responsibility is 1005 percent on the parents to decide if something is ok for their children to watch. Most parents that complain that their children were corrupted by movies or video games are the same parents who werent paying enough attention to their kids to begin with. No two kids are the same, so a parent should decide what their child can watch, since some 12 year olds are more mature than some 16 year olds. Even if the family doesnt have time or money to prescreen movies for their kids, they could take 15 minutes to do some research online. I know when i have kids i would rather decide on my own if my kid can handle it, than have a group of people without children tell me whats best for them.
"KILL IF YOU WILL BUT COMMAND ME NOTHING!!" -
jutuomin — 14 years ago(August 02, 2011 01:16 PM)
As for myself I believe that the system that is now being held in Finland seems quite good. It includes a governmental organisation (VET, Finnish Board of Film Classification), which rates films (and other audiovisual material) according how harmful it would be to a child.
There are 6 different categories that are marked with a number. That number indicates that the material is not harmful to a child of that age (or older). The categories are: 3, 7, 11, 13, 15 and 18.
Category 18 (K18 for short) usually includes horror, violence and porn. K3 includes
My Little Ponies
and sorts.
VET doesn't have any guide lines about the film quality. It has stated before that it doesn't rate language. As it is certainly not pleasant to hear bad language there isn't any indication that it'd be harmful to a child.
Also VET doesn't rated nudity if there is no sexual content present. This is for the same reason, but also probably because in Finnish culture nudity itself isn't considered a taboo.
Also what I like about the system that it's 100% open. Anyone can see who has rated the movie, every single time it has been viewed by VET. The voting results are all open and you can see if the voting has been unanimous or not. And the members of VET are experts in audio visual media or child protection or otherwise part of the Ministery of Education.
So as an answer to the question. I think VET has been doing very good job and that seems to be if not best, then at least a very good way to rate movies.
Here are some links that I found about VET:
Brief overview:
http://www.vet.fi/english/yleista.php
Some guidelines:
http://www.vet.fi/english/elokuvat_ikarajaluokitus.php
Age Category Details:
http://www.vet.fi/english/elokuvat_ikarajat_ja_merkinnat.php
(All links are in English - I am sure there is even more information in Finnish.) -
LeMunson — 14 years ago(August 02, 2011 09:49 PM)
Best rating system is no one whatsoever, film ratings over the years has caused good art to be censored and decline in quality. It has caused the PG 13 horror movie to gain extreme popularity, and worst of all it has made any NC 17 movie basically unavailable in theaters.
I'm still a teenager and not even close to having kids, but I'm pretty sure if they were to watch a movie rated R, or even NC 17, it wouldn't affect them in the long run. -
vikesluvr — 14 years ago(September 23, 2011 02:49 PM)
So many of the arguments on this post have nothing to do with our rating system and instead about who enforces the rating system. It is not the systems fault if parents or theaters choose to disregard their ratings.
Therefore, the best rating system is kids-in-mind.com or similar sights that simply state what is in the movie and the extent to which it goes. This allows for a parent to truly determine if they will allow their children the opportunity to watch a film. That being said, I still believe that theaters should be held accountable for the persons to whom they show a movie just as I believe stores should be held accountable for the persons to whom they sell movies, video games, magazines, etc. To state that there should be no rating system eliminates accountability on the part of businesses in dispensing their product to minors. If as a parent I choose not to allow my child to view pornographic, violent, vulgar, or immoral material, I should be supported in that attempt by an industry standard stating what is in the product before I view or purchase it. Also, if you truly do enjoy these types of materials, you should still respect the fact that there may be others who do not and appreciate the ability to be forewarned at the presence of such material.
