American Politics & Pop Culture

Maria Hodgson argues that Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) rules and regulations to films can be viewed as a form of censorship to film-makers as well as to producers. She presented good arguments in favor to this system but also presents the fall backs to MPAA decisions. The article itself tells us about films that are able to bypass the rating system because it is not mandatory. It also tells us about Hugh Heffner’s change of his movie from X to R in order to sell more copies. The article finally tells us about the system of G rating to X rating and what they mean. Not only how they are reflected in the MPAA but how society views the movies as either ways of advertising or ways of enticing the viewers.

One of the points the articles addresses is that with out the such organizations like the MPAA a dark curtain would fall on the creativity in cinema. So we are supposed to believe that an organization who, she said it herself, that is not mandatory to get your movies passed thru did not exist that people would have different opinions on their film making abilities? I mean I can see why the author tells us about films like Hugh Heffner’s film and why he needed to change the rating, but to go to the extreme and label film-makers as people affected by this rating as a censorship is a little extreme. I am not saying that film-makers should go crazy and start placing anything on the screen, I am just saying that creativity is not at compromise from this rating system. This article is a little dated because some of the rules have changed for films and what can be rated a PG compared to a R is very different. The author does offer insight into other ratings, such as MA and PG-13 that didn’t exist at the time but do exist today. All in all the authors arguments are supportive but coming to the conclusion that creativity is affected is not something that is at compromise, especially in today’s society with the newest rating system impositions.