Kendra Elm Censorship
In the movie â€śThis Film is Not Yet Ratedâ€? many of the filmmakers that were interviewed were upset with the rating given to their film by the MPAA. From what we see in the film the ratings are very arbitrary, and the ratings board wasnâ€™t what they claimed to be. For one thing most of the raters had children that were out of their teens, and the majority were over the age of thirty. Also, on the appeals committee there were members from the church present. The most shocking thing about the MPAA to me was that when a film was rated and the filmmaker was unhappy they gave suggestions about how they could get their rating changed. Some of the suggestions were acceptable, but they were very inconsistent between films. For example they allowed a scene of male masturbating, but not a female. The rating committee was very concerned about sex scenes, but not as concerned about violence. Which was very odd according to some of those interviewed, because sex is much more accepted in film when compared to other countries.
The most interesting aspect to me was how everyone believed that these ratings are so helpful to parents, and they are necessary in order for them to make good decisions on films for their children. But, what the film looked at, and what no one seems to notice is that they are only helpful because there is nothing to compare it to. There has never been another nation wide system of rating films for language, violence and sex, so when this system was developed of course it was well liked. Because there is no competition this allows the MPAA to do whatever they want, more or less, without consequence.
For the most part this film showed the faults of the MPAA, and how they are so uncooperative when working with filmmakers. I think Kirby Dick and the other filmmakers in this movie would agree with the statement that the MPAA rating system is arbitrary and there is not good logic to deciding the film ratings.