This Film Is Not Yet Rated Review
by Steve Rhodes (Steve DOT Rhodes AT InternetReviews DOT com)October 14th, 2006
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED
A film review by Steve Rhodes
Copyright 2006 Steve Rhodes
RATING (0 TO ****): ***
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED is a fascinating and fun film that exposes the inconsistent and bizarre ratings decisions of the MPAA rating board. If you've ever been angry about some rating decision, for example, not understanding why one picture gets an R while another and more explicit one gets a PG-13, this movie will give you facts that are likely to make you even more upset. With example after example, director Kirby Dick amply demonstrates how capricious and ridiculous board decisions can be.
Reportedly most directors refused to talk to Dick, lest the rating board hold it against them. This is not an unreasonable fear, since the board members are all kept strictly secret, something that doesn't happen in any of the 29 other countries with similar organizations.
The directors and actors who were brave enough to speak out tended to be those who worked more for the non-MPAA studios, which are very few. The six major studios, which belong to the MPAA, control 95% of the movie market. One lawyer opines that the MPAA could be successfully sued on antitrust grounds, but no one has invested the money to try. Films tagged with the dreaded NC-17 are not able to advertise in most media outlets, and their DVDs cannot be sold in most mass market stores like Wal-Mart and Target. This means that an NC-17 is a kiss of death, very much akin to censorship. Moreover, most studios contractually obligate filmmakers to get a rating below NC-17.
Director John Waters is shocked that, even after an appeal, his A DIRTY SHAME got an NC-17 for just talking about sex. Kimberly Peirce, director of BOYS DON'T CRY, an Academy Award-winning movie, was pleased that her movie initially got an NC-17, since she wanted it to be realistic. But, after it was explained to her the consequences of the film being NC-17, she asked what she needed to change. The board listed only a few modifications, but they were pretty bizarre. One female orgasm scene went on too long. Another concerned a quick wipe off of a tiny amount of semen on a mouth. The board, on the other hand, had no problem with a scene in which a gunshot caused human brains to be splattered against the wall.
THE COOLER was initially slapped with an NC-17 rating because, in a lovely sex scene between devoted lovers, played by William H. Macy and Maria Bello, we get a one-second glimpse of the edge of Bello's pubic hair. It made no difference that in a sleazy scene in FATAL ATTRACTION, Sharon Stone showed a lot of pubic hair and more, but FATAL ATTRACTION got an R rating.
Dick hires a private investigator to track down the faces and identities of current MPAA raters, and he interviews a couple of previous ones, who dare speak under threat of a lawsuit from the MPAA. The whole investigation part of the movie is fun at first, but the results aren't particularly exciting, so a little less of it would have been better.
He gives plenty of examples to make his point. TEAM AMERICA, for example, initially got an NC-17 for sex between two puppets, which is a comical act that probably every kid in America has done at some point. Thinking the MPAA rating board was a joke, the TEAM AMERICA filmmakers put in four full minutes of puppet sex, including ridiculous acts. They wanted to give the MPAA a lot of stuff to cut, but also, they figured, leaving them a lot the raters wouldn't mention and hence could be left in.
We get numerous examples of how the rating board takes the depiction of human sexuality, even completely normal, mainstream acts, as being a much more serious issue than even the most graphic of violence. The film isn't, however, as convincing in its widely repeated thesis that European rating boards are more stringent when it comes to violence than sex. It may well be true, but this documentary offered no proof whatsoever, just a few people claiming it.
So was THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED submitted to rating board? Of course. The raters slapped an immediate NC-17 on it, and the film lost the appeal by a vote of 10 to 0. You do not want to mess with the MPAA rating board. Since it was to be rated NC-17 for "some graphic sexual content," the filmmakers decided to release it unrated. This is something a film released by an MPAA studio can't do, since membership in the MPAA requires a studio to get all of its films rated and to list the final rating given.
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED runs a little long at 1:37. It is not rated but would be NC-17 for the brief graphic sexual scenes and would be acceptable for most teenagers.
The film is playing in nationwide release now in the United States. In the Silicon Valley, it is showing at the Camera Cinemas.
Web: http://www.InternetReviews.com
Email: [email protected]
***********************************************************************
Want free reviews and weekly movie and video recommendations via Email?
Just send me a letter with the word "subscribe" in the subject line.
More on 'This Film Is Not Yet Rated'...
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
