The Best Rating System is…
-
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. -
vikesluvr — 13 years ago(April 14, 2012 01:17 PM)
I realize that this is months later. I just barely realized that someone had replied.
I am curious as to how a parent will know what is contained in a movie if some other outside entity does not supply a some sort of description of what is in the movie. As I understand it, the government does not run the MPAA, is that where you believe that I implied the government's involvement? or is it in the enforcement of the policy? In a person's own home they can control (for the most part) access to material. Internet filters, passwords on television, etc. However, outside of the home, others should be held accountable for what they sell, distribute, or allow others to see. For example, the neighborhood pawn shop can't sell a gun to specific individual.
Therefore, I believe that there should be laws that are enforced about what people distribute to minors. If you don't agree with that, I would be interested in knowing if you believe that a retailer should be able to distribute anything it wishes to anyone, or if there are some form of limitations you would apply. I would also like to know if you believe it is a right for a parent to limit access to pornographic, violent, vulgar, or objectionable material to minors. If yes, how would that be made possible without another entity helping, and if not the government, then what would it be?
If you would like to have a conversation, I am open to it. However, you begin every reply with "you are full of it" and then tell others to "grow up". Neither one of these items make you appear like you are genuine or sincere in an interest to have a discussion. Therefore, I doubt that this will go any further than this reply, or one more from you with remarks about my intelligence or backwards thinking, to which I will not reply. -
pjwoodall1 — 14 years ago(January 24, 2012 05:08 AM)
Years ago the AFI(DC) had an evening with Jack Valenti as part of its Sensuality on Film series. Valentin talked about the Production Code and how it had become outdated by the mid 60's due to movies such as Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf and Blow Up, and the ratings system. He also had clips from The Wild Bunch, Carnal Knowledge and other controversial films. One woman raked him over the coals for not giving The Exorcist an X rating.
Three other thoughtsThe AFI also had an evening with Garson Kanin with My Favorite Wife and Adam's Rib. Kanin preferred the old days under the Code because it forced filmmaker to be more creative in seeing how they could get around the censors.
The commentary for The Bride of Frankenstein has a story about director James Whale who took some friends to see his new movie. Apparently he started laughing at how much they had gotten past the censors. Finally a woman turned to him and said "If you don't like the movie, why don't you leave?"
The worst movie I ever saw was the German film Nekromantik 2 about a woman who has two loversone living, the other dead. Police seized the film after a judge declared it obscene and all copies were ordered destroyed. I had do desire to see Part One or any other films by the director. -
pjwoodall1 — 14 years ago(February 18, 2012 03:38 AM)
The Valenti program was one of several I attended years ago at the AFI which stick in my memoryGene Kelly, Jimmy Stewart, Rudy Vallee, Chuck Jones, Elizabeth Taylor, etc. along with special showings of Nashville, Black Sunday Harold Lloyd's Safety First and an evening of Charley Chase.
After the AFI moved the Silver Spring MD, I missed out on Eastwood, Jeanne Moreau and Patricia Hitchcok. I still remember Mike Nichols turning up in the audience for Black Sunday and saying the last half hour almost gave him a heart attack.
Thank you for writing. -
TheManInOil — 14 years ago(March 28, 2012 06:35 PM)
What a shocking notion - that people with children should actually take responsibility for parenting. Too radical. It'll never fly.
"I'll book you. I'll book you on something. I'll find something in the book to book you on." -
Frostrose — 13 years ago(June 22, 2012 09:28 PM)
Rating hurts NO ONE! So why all this complaining about it. It is only useful for those of us who do NOT wish to see the whole movies before we decide it's OK for our children or not. Perhaps we don't want to pollute our souls with filth and get awful things imprinted on our minds when a rating system makes it is so much easier, or perhaps we don't have time to watch every movie TWICE!
-
ItalianGreyhound — 13 years ago(January 02, 2013 08:55 PM)
Actually, the USA is one of the few countries in the world that does not have government-mandated movie censorship. Unlike other countries where you absolutely must submit a film for certification (and edit it to get it passed if required), in the USA you can go ahead and release your film in any format without any certification. In fact, many smaller distributors save a lot of money by not submitting their films to the MPAA. The certification only exists because the major theatre chains will not play anything without a rating (and of course, many won't play NC-17 rated movies either). When studios decide to edit their films for a certain MPAA rating, it's purely financial - nobody is stopping them from releasing it.
(i'm not an American, btw)