The MPAA's Rating System

[Negoogunogumbar]

I'm pretty confident that anyone familiar with films in the US is familiar with the MPAA's rating system, G, PG, PG-13, R, and NC-17. Personally I don't think it's very good. The G and NC-17 ratings are useless. PG basically makes G useless. NC-17 has a stigma of being porn and any movie rated NC-17 is pretty much a failure because most theaters won't carry them and most newspapers won't print their advertisements.

This causes problems. The R rating is loaded with movies that should be NC-17 like Hostel, Grindhouse, and 300 because otherwise no one would see these movies. This makes the R rating more violent than it should be. The PG-13 rating is the most successful rating money wise (For movies not marketed at kids), as most teenagers can see it without any problems arising. Naturally movies bump up their content or trim it down slightly to be awarded the rating.

How movie ratings are determined by the MPAA is also suspect. How many times a movie says the word "fuck" or shows a nipple shouldn't determine the rating of the movie, how a movie uses language, violence, or sex should determine the movie's rating.

[Fleamo]

I think any ratings system which makes it impossible for someone of a certain age to see a particular movie, despite actual level of maturity, is wrong.  Who is the MPAA to decide that someone is magically mature enough at age 17 but not at age 16.9999? 

I am fine with rating systems, as long as they are fair and the authors release whatever arbitrary system they use to rate to the people who will be using the ratings system.  I don't care if you say 3 strokes into the pie from American Pie is NC-17 but 1 stroke is R.  What I do care is when you say a 15-year-old is mature enough to see 1 stroke [if accompanied by an adult], but if it goes to 3 strokes you won't admit them no matter what.

What I really hate is that this is voluntary censorship.  The government ain't got nothin' to do with it. 

[ShadowCat]

I do agree with the NC-17 being useless.  I don't know if anyone else's state even uses this rating.  No movies have come out or have been shown and any movie theater near me that uses such rating.  As for the rest of the ratings, I could care less. 

Nudity should be at the R rating because, even though I'm being stereotypical here, most 13 year olds would just start giggling, makea comment like "ew that's gross", or some immature action.  I was 13 once, but I never said/did anything like that.  I might wince at blood spurting from a chopped off head or turn my head at some foo' getting raped on the silver screen, but that's about it

[Negoogunogumbar]

I think any ratings system which makes it impossible for someone of a certain age to see a particular movie, despite actual level of maturity, is wrong.  Who is the MPAA to decide that someone is magically mature enough at age 17 but not at age 16.9999?

This is also something I don't like. The rating system should be a guideline that parents and customers use to determine whether a film is appropriate or inappropriate for their children or themselves to see, not a guideline for the theaters to use to determine who gets into the movie.

[GAMEFREAK]

I think that the NC-17 and G ratings are definatly useless.
I agree more with Fleamo than anybody.  If there would be no age limit that would be better.  But there should still be warnings for parents so they know what they getting themselves into.
I wouldn't have minded seeing 300 without my friend's mom there.  That was awkward.  Me and my friend (well at least I am) are mature enough to see a R movie by ourselves.

[Hyruleansoldier]

I think that the NC-17 and G ratings are definitely useless.
I agree more with Fleamo than anybody.  If there would be no age limit that would be better.  But there should still be warnings for parents so they know what they getting themselves into.
I wouldn't have minded seeing 300 without my friend's mom there.  That was awkward.  Me and my friend (well at least I am) are mature enough to see a R movie by ourselves.

Definitely.  Honestly, it's VERY lame, and just suits the mood of these lousy commité people who will decide to make certain movies restricted just because of a little functional nudity or a little blood.  The people who decide on these rules can hardly be called movie critics nor social anthropologist.  They usually haven't a clue as to which audience would sit well on which movie.

The whole accompanying thing is a load of bollocks as well.  It serves no purpose whatsoever.  Cause what does it do, make the nudity or blood mysteriously disappears by the secrets powers of the accompanying parents?  Bullshit.

I only agree on a rating for REALLY violent or explicit sexual things, those things should not be "viewable" by 14 year-olds, and some not by 17-year-olds as well.

Of course it's way cool for kids to try and go see all these movies just because there IS that rating.  On any level, they'd be better off with a more laid-back and less intrusive system. 

[Faceless]

I think the Australian system works well:

    * E - Exempt From Classification. The content varies depending on the show / film.
    * G - General Audinces. The content is very mild in impact.
    * PG - Parental Guidance Recommended. The content is mild in impact.
    * M - Recommended For Mature Audiences Only. The content is moderate in impact.
    * MA-15+ - Not Suitable For People Under 15. The content is strong in impact.
    * R-18+ - Restricted To Adults 18 Years And Over. The content is high in impact.
    * RC - Refused Classification. Illegal for sale or hire in Australia.

The ratings board is comprised mostly of liberal members, therefore the OFLC has a strong influence on "Informing your Choices", rather than "censorship." Thus very detailed content descriptions are used. Film Advertising is accompanied by a Colour Coding and a Specific Shape for each classification level. This is accompanied by information such as mild, moderate, strong or high level coarse language, nudity, sexual references, themes and so on. However this is generally unstandardised and very detailed information such as "Suicide Themes" or "Bereavement Themes" and so forth can be included.

[Fleamo]

    * RC - Refused Classification. Illegal for sale or hire in Australia.

There's where it goes wrong.  It should be legal to refuse classification.

[Faceless]

That's only given to things like Terrorist Training videos though.
There was also a video being sold (not in retail outlets of course) recently of 8ish school kids who had recorded themselves pissing on, and molesting a young girl that earned the same rating, and rightly so.

[Hyruleansoldier]

That's only given to things like Terrorist Training videos though.
There was also a video being sold (not in retail outlets of course) recently of 8ish school kids who had recorded themselves pissing on, and molesting a young girl that earned the same rating, and rightly so.

RC is good...

But all those PG & MA ratings...  Honestly, having to have an adult accompany you is SO lame.  What does it change to the contents of the movie, I ask you?  Does this adult magically filter out the "potentially strong impact" or something?  Honestly.

[Faceless]

PG is only a recommendation parents can use to decide whether or not they think their child should be watching the content of the show. It isn't restrictive in any way.
MA doesn't require an adult to accompany you unless you're under 15. Generally MA movies aren't the sort of movies parents want their young kids watching, so the system works.

[Mongooseman]

I think we need a better rating system, one similar to the ESRB's that has good content descriptors, because the current one is terrible. I do like the parental restriction thing, though. No, it doesn't change the content of the movie if a parent is there, but it does keep kids from seeing something they shouldn't behind their parent's backs. Maybe a requirement of parental permission rather than attendance would be a good compromise.

[MoTD]

There should be two ratings:

Level E: Less or nonexistent scenes of violence, sexual themes, less mature content.

Level M: Possible scenes of violence, sexual themes, more mature content.

Short, simple and too the point. It shouldn't be too hard for you to tell weather or not the movie is appropriate for your children regardless of the rating it gets.

[Faceless]

There should be two ratings:

Level E: Less or nonexistent scenes of violence, sexual themes, less mature content.

Level M: Possible scenes of violence, sexual themes, more mature content.

Short, simple and too the point. It shouldn't be too hard for you to tell weather or not the movie is appropriate for your children regardless of the rating it gets.

Do you seriously believe this?
I'm guessing you haven't thought it through.