Jeff Tow Arnett Some Material May Be Inappropriate or
The article written by the New York Times Some Material May Be Inappropriate or Mystifying, and the Rating May Be as Well reviews the documentary of This Film Is Not Yet Rated directed by Kirby Dick. This documentary is viewed by the New York Times as intellectually engaging however does not answer tough questions as to what does some language mean and are thematic elements harmful to children. This article talks about how Mr. Dick tries to uncover The Motion Picture of America Association secretive organization. Mr. Dick hires private detectives to sit outside and scribble down licenses plate numbers of the MPAA secret members. The documentary material includes “interviews with filmmakers and scholars, clips from movies that have run into trouble with the board, and occasional sound bites from Mr. Valenti (Scott, 2006)”.
Mr. Dick proceeds to uncover inconsistencies from the MPAA organization. Testimonies from film directors show that the MPAA is very inconsistence with the rating the give. There seems to be no process to their ratings. “The record of its recent decisions suggests
a special squeamishness about depictions of female sexual pleasure and a picayune
fastidiousness about certain body parts. A glimpse of Maria Bello’s pubic hair, for
instance, threatened to doom “The Cooler” to an NC-17. But then again, “A Dirty
Shame,” John Waters’s 2004 film, received the same rating just for talking about certain
outré practices while showing almost no skin at all (Scott, 2006)”. This article gives some of the inconsistence examples from This Film Is Not Yet Rated to demonstrate what Mr. Kirby uncovers. The article states that the MPAA is a “process that often involves guessing just what those standards are (Scott, 2006)”. The New York Times film review by Scott goes on to say that while this is a very intellectual engaging film its clear that Mr. Dick is one-sided clearly defending the film makers. The New York Times feels that Mr. Dick narrow scope focused on movie going and movie making was frustrating because the Times felt that there were other important issues that Mr. Dick could have incorporated into his film.
This article review by the New York Times does an effective job of accurately representing this film. The New York Times interpretation of how Mr. Dick’s scope was too narrow could not have been more correct. There are other issues that people would like to know about like how parents are supposed protect their kids from the inconsistencies of these ratings. Mr. Dick focused too much on the artistic element and would have liked to seen how this rating system could have been improved. This article film critique did an outstanding job in the review of this film and gives an intelligent view point.