This Film is Not Yet Rated
Franklin’s claim that “At least in the current environment, creative, thoughtful and even subversive films can get made” (147) is naïve. In comparison to fifty years ago, films today are certainly far more “risqué.” However, so is society. There in lies the question: is society a reflection of the media or is media a reflection of society? In the 1950’s movie were more conservative and, in comparison to today, so was society. Our “current environment” in society and the world is a more “creative, thoughtful and even subversive,” – since the 1960’s freedom of … anything (!) has become the “way of the world.” Many filmmakers disagree that the current environment provides for complete artistic freedom. “Subversive” is, again, relative, especially in the filmmaking industry controlled by corporate, and MPAA, interests. What “sells” is made, not necessarily what is thought-provoking or artistic. According to the MPAA, sex is a more subversive topic, and thus violence would have a better chance at an “R” rating, and access to more money that a sexual film that would be given an NC17 rating. Sex, although more prevalent in today’s society, is still much less accepted worldwide. And since American films often receive a lot of global success, it is smarter financially to support and release a film with “gratuitous violence” than a film with abundant sexual content. Violence exists worldwide, even more so in some countries than in the United States, but much sexual content is still regarded on very conservative values in most parts of the world. Either way, violent and sexual expression in filmmaking has developed and increased with time, but is still controlled by the MPAA and corporate interests of the U.S., and ultimately, the world.