Featured Audience Ratings

• Jeff "

  
  Terrific documentary on film censorship, This Film is Not Yet Rated takes a look at the MPAA the organization who give films its ratings. Director Kirby Dick interviews some prominent filmmakers who have had their films certified with unwanted ratings due to the amount of explicit… More
  Terrific documentary on film censorship, This Film is Not Yet Rated takes a look at the MPAA the organization who give films its ratings. Director Kirby Dick interviews some prominent filmmakers who have had their films certified with unwanted ratings due to the amount of explicit content in their films. The film shares the points of view of the filmmakers and gives us insight into how unfair the rating system really is. I thoroughly enjoyed this film, and it does a great job at telling the story from the point of view of the people that make the films. For me, I think it's preposturous for someone to tell me what I can, and cannot watch. As you get older, you realize that film is an art form, and how wonderful films can be. By censoring them and telling the filmmakers they have to cut their work, the MPAA waters down, and in many ways destroy the intention and goal for the filmmaker to entertain its audience. Films should be uncompromising and many movies out there are tasteless, extreme and offensive, but the best judge of what to watch is you. This Film is Not Yet Rated is an eye opening film and it should be seen by every film lover. This is a near perfect documentary that finally tells the side of the filmmakers and how the MPAA butchers their art. Brilliant, funny and at times unfair in the sense that one organization has practically given themselves the right to judge what is best for us to watch, This Film is Not Yet Rated is a well crafted must see documentary.

• E.J. B

  
  Almost right after watching A Serbian Film, I stumbled across a documentary that addressed the idea of corrupt movie censorship head-on, and the result is so much more rewarding. Interviewing many of today's filmmakers who have had their films sanctioned by the MPAA, director… More
  Almost right after watching A Serbian Film, I stumbled across a documentary that addressed the idea of corrupt movie censorship head-on, and the result is so much more rewarding. Interviewing many of today's filmmakers who have had their films sanctioned by the MPAA, director Kirby Dick tries to get at the heart of what exactly is the criteria used when applying these ratings - G, PG, PG-13, R, NC-17 - to films, and who are the people who make such decisions. What follows is something quite disturbing. From first hand accounts of people who have worked at the MPAA as well as filmmakers who have had to battle to get their films "properly" rated, we learn that there is no real criteria that distinguishes an R from an NC-17, and that the decision makers are not only anonymous to the public but security measures have been set up to protect these people from ever being known. This Film is Not Yet Rated shows just how much a particular rating can affect the box office performance of your film, and beyond that, how accessible your film will be to the general public. In one scene you learn that most theatres and big retail chains will not carry an NC-17 rated film. Talk about limiting freedom of expression. Also, through comparisons between how lenient the MPAA is towards violence as opposed to sex, how big studio films will receive detailed and specific ways to get their films tailored to a specific rating while independent filmmakers are left with nothing more than a vague response, this documentary reveals an organization that doesn't know what it's doing. Instead, it is a system designed as a false safeguard to parents based on some false moral ground that Uncle Sam is watching out for you and that "somebody is thinking of the children." But it's a joke. Filmmakers can argue their ratings on what they think is suitable for a particular rating, but if there are no standards set out for these ratings, how can any of these ratings be legitimate?

• Japes .

  
  It's a more informal documentary that I wasn't expecting. It was pretty entertaining though. MPAA seems like a sketchy organization.

• Drake T

  
  Not as enlightening or surprising as the tone of the film suggests. The parts with the PI were moderately amusing at best. In the end you're left with information that you probably already knew about a system that non-filmmakers just ignore and what little information you… More
  Not as enlightening or surprising as the tone of the film suggests. The parts with the PI were moderately amusing at best. In the end you're left with information that you probably already knew about a system that non-filmmakers just ignore and what little information you DIDN'T know; you can't/won't do anything about. So the real question is, why?

• Lucas M

  
  Shocking! Astounding! Entertaining! A discovery about the not ethical tactics of the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). The controversial documentarian, Kirby Dick, bring a different realty of this powerful system. Rare images, one detailed investigation about the hypocrite… More
  Shocking! Astounding! Entertaining! A discovery about the not ethical tactics of the MPAA (Motion Picture Association of America). The controversial documentarian, Kirby Dick, bring a different realty of this powerful system. Rare images, one detailed investigation about the hypocrite way to classify the films and information that the audience lost because their ratings. This Film Is Not Yet Rated, made the real work of cinema, open eyes, without lose the sense of humor. Recommendable and fresh.

• Spencer S

  
  One of the absolute BEST documentaries out there, and my personal favorite, This Film...explores the censoring eye of the MPDDA, and their true intentions in keeping sex out of the American home and gun violence in, interviewing directors who've been there, the history of the… More
  One of the absolute BEST documentaries out there, and my personal favorite, This Film...explores the censoring eye of the MPDDA, and their true intentions in keeping sex out of the American home and gun violence in, interviewing directors who've been there, the history of the morality movement, and how it affects what we watch and integrate into our culture.

• _kelly .

  
  Brilliant expose of the most influential censorship organization in American film. But what else does one expect besides brilliance from the ingenious mind of Kirby Dick?

• Leigh R

  
  Great. I never liked the ratings system. My thought is that it's a parents job to view a movie and see if they will let their child see it. Why be lazy and let some people you don't know decide randomly for you. Plus, I had also noticed before this film at how random the… More
  Great. I never liked the ratings system. My thought is that it's a parents job to view a movie and see if they will let their child see it. Why be lazy and let some people you don't know decide randomly for you. Plus, I had also noticed before this film at how random the ratings are and what it still gets classified as. There are some films that have an R rating, that I would have PG-13 and vice-versus. Very interesting for sure.

• Jason S

  
  A really good look into how films are rated and by who. A lot of people might not know how this whole thing works and in some cases it comes off as being very flawed. The doc is well made and covers the subject very well even if it is from a point of view that doesn't think the… More
  A really good look into how films are rated and by who. A lot of people might not know how this whole thing works and in some cases it comes off as being very flawed. The doc is well made and covers the subject very well even if it is from a point of view that doesn't think the system is working. One of the highlights of the film is when the ratings review board has to review this film.

• Luke B

  
  It's no surprise that the US rating system is a huge sham. It's hypocritical, inconsistent and biased. Anybody that watches films can tell you this. What is so fascinating and surprising is the level of secrecy surrounding the MPAA. They act like a top-secret team of… More
  It's no surprise that the US rating system is a huge sham. It's hypocritical, inconsistent and biased. Anybody that watches films can tell you this. What is so fascinating and surprising is the level of secrecy surrounding the MPAA. They act like a top-secret team of Government Sanctioned Superheroes. Infuriating secrets are revealed, such as the madness of the appeals system. As a documentary it's brilliant. It highlights the absurdity of it's subject, uses humour to good affect and actually made a difference. After the films release the MPAA allowed examples to be used in appeals. Kirby Dick gets some great interviews and even has time for some character development with his hired Private Investigator. The film is biased, but this is only because the MPAA refuse to speak to Dick. It's the uncovering of a paranoid and outdated system. One that has no idea what the hell it's doing, yet somehow manages to stay in control.

• Michael G

  
  This Film is Not Yet Rated starts off as an expose on the MPAA--a shadowy organization responsible for how movies are rated and why. The interviews with the directors and their experiences with the MPAA are interesting; as was director Kirby Dick's methods he employed to find out… More
  This Film is Not Yet Rated starts off as an expose on the MPAA--a shadowy organization responsible for how movies are rated and why. The interviews with the directors and their experiences with the MPAA are interesting; as was director Kirby Dick's methods he employed to find out who the raters are. Or were. This movie does get loony after awhile but not Who Killed the Electric Car loony. This Film is Not Yet Rated wasn't amazing but there are worse ways to spend a Sunday afternoon.

• Dan S

  
  A scathing satire regarding the MPAA and its controlling capital. The biggest irony in this entire thing is that the film earned an NC-17, when its just like any other R rated movie I've ever seen. Kirby Dick explores that hypocrisy as well as the secrecy the MPAA feels they need… More
  A scathing satire regarding the MPAA and its controlling capital. The biggest irony in this entire thing is that the film earned an NC-17, when its just like any other R rated movie I've ever seen. Kirby Dick explores that hypocrisy as well as the secrecy the MPAA feels they need to provide in order to "protect" children while in the end, they just look like children the way they're running this organization. An eye-opening and often hilarious documentary that should be seen by anyone who asks the question, "Why was this rated this way?"

• Arash X

  
  An interesting & informative documentary about MPAA's ratings

• Nicki M

  
  Interesting. I was more horrified by some of the violent stuff that does get through than the stuff they have major issues with! This system definitely needs looking at.

• Aaron N

  
  "We don't create standards; we just follow them" This is a documentary about the MPAA film ratings system. It goes into detail about how the MPAA is run very secretively and how ridiculous the whole system is. Several filmmakers are interviewed about their movies and… More
  "We don't create standards; we just follow them" This is a documentary about the MPAA film ratings system. It goes into detail about how the MPAA is run very secretively and how ridiculous the whole system is. Several filmmakers are interviewed about their movies and the treatment they received when having to deal with NC-17 ratings and the possibility of editing their work. The film also examines a number of common issues concerning the strange rules and standards the raters seem to follow, including issues such as violence not being as big of a deal as sex, homosexuality in film being treated much harsher than heterosexuality, and the subject of the raters themselves (who's identities are held secret from the public, so they don't have to face outside pressure of course). This film's director, Kirby Dick, also employs a PI to monitor the MPAA building and possibly learn the identities of the raters. The final section of the film actually deals with rating this very movie, the rating, and the appeals process (this film was released not rated). The documentary is very entertaining, complete with some flashy title cards and animation, as well as plenty of cut scenes are re-edited movies. Of course as a documentary, it leans towards one side of the problem, however its tough to find any sort of counter, unless your an extremely right-wing Jesus freak. What does matter is that the film is entertaining, and it is, as well as being a good way to see the MPAA get their ass kicked. Herself - Rating Board Chairperson: We don't give out that information.

• Steve K

  
  Eh, not as good as I'd hoped it would be. Pretty much all the revelations were in the trailers and reviews. The great MPAA expose film still remains to be done. Not a bad film, though.

• Daniel H

  
  A reasonably well made film, although it definitley doesn't stand firm as a serious documentary. It watches more like a feature-length TV News Special Report, complete with airing the names of the secretive members of the MPAA Reviews Board, a private investigator, and taped… More
  A reasonably well made film, although it definitley doesn't stand firm as a serious documentary. It watches more like a feature-length TV News Special Report, complete with airing the names of the secretive members of the MPAA Reviews Board, a private investigator, and taped telephone conversations. In it's defense, much of this is simply due to the rather independent nature of the film, and some rather limited goals. One really would like much more facts or coverage, instead of slapdash moments of inference which really could have been covered in much shorter a time. It falls into the documentary pitfall of having half of your documentary be about how you made your documentary.

• Sarah G

  
  A look into the mysterious organization that decides what rating a film is given. And all sorts of other issues/arguments that are created because of it. Numerous actors, directors, producers, former MPAA raters and critics share their thoughts on the good and bad of the highly… More
  A look into the mysterious organization that decides what rating a film is given. And all sorts of other issues/arguments that are created because of it. Numerous actors, directors, producers, former MPAA raters and critics share their thoughts on the good and bad of the highly secretive organization. Really this is an interesting insight into the ridiculous American ratings system by the MPAA. It is also an entertaining one, as they do find some of the raters on the boarsd.You also can see just really how different American's are to our ratings system here in the UK. I mean Oldboy gets a R rating when the violence is so obvious in that. Anyway, we begin to see just how different Americans are. For instance, they are far more lianent with Violence, hence Oldboy, boy yet anything Sex related gets a NC-17 or same sex sex for instance. Our BFI is the total opposite. What I don;t get is why it is a secret with the raters. Seems pretty ridiculous. However the film is incredibly biased towards it's theme. At no point does Kirby Dick get a view from the MPAA. It does get annoy at times but it's interesting to see that 4 of American's major conglomarated own 95% of America's entertainment. Also, that there are representatives of every company at the ratings. Makes you wonder just what American's think of their movies. Astonishingly, NC-17 movies are not avalible to buy at Blockbuster and Supermarkers in the U.S. Also interesting, the role of the clergy in movie rating. Yes, I did say clergy, as in priests. In the appeals commission there are always an episcopalian priest and a catholic one. No other religions get to add their input. A must see movie, not a conspiracy theory film, but certainly one that is against the system. The system here being the absurd movie rating system of the MPAA. Overall a must see movie to see an insight into this stupic ratings system in the U,S. <b>Highly recomended</b>

• Gordon A

  
  Unsurprising account of US censorship

• Nate Z

  
  [center][img]http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7753/20060911shortbusnd2.jpg[/img] [/center] [font=Arial][color=DarkRed] Shortbus – How do we define pornography? John Cameron Mitchell (creator of Hedwig and the Angry Inch) wrote and directed an examination on human… More
  [center][img]http://img166.imageshack.us/img166/7753/20060911shortbusnd2.jpg[/img] [/center] [font=Arial][color=DarkRed] Shortbus – How do we define pornography? John Cameron Mitchell (creator of Hedwig and the Angry Inch) wrote and directed an examination on human relationships that also employs hardcore sex. Yes, the actors are really having sex and we really see, among other things, a man fellate himself to climax. There’s hetero sex, homo sex, masturbation, and, in small flashes, a whole sweaty orgy of people of all shapes, sizes, colors, and tastes. This movie celebrates the sheer possibilities and enjoyment of sex. Mitchell isn’t the first serious filmmaker to show people really doing it, and the movie shows sex in a realistic fashion that is rarely seen, with all the humor, playfulness, and stumbles that can arise. It’s refreshing and a great window into the depths of human interaction. That’s the deal: everyone in this film is reaching out to feel something. The script mostly follows the pursuit of a sex therapist who has never had an orgasm. The sex will get the headlines, but it’s the quiet reflections on human connection that really sneaks up on you and can hit hard. The movie doesn’t cover every facet with ease, like a stalker-esque character, and some of the acting is a bit amateurish; however, it’s a daring film that has a disarming sweetness to it and an open hearted message that's rather romantic after all. And no, it’s not porn. Nate’s Grade: B Little Children – Director Todd Field ([i]In the Bedroom[/i]) and author Tom Perotta ([i]Election[/i]) have created the most incisive, mordant, and entertaining peek into suburban life since 1999’s [i]American Beauty[/i]. You really feel the carnal yearning that Kate Winslet and Patrick Wilson have as they inch their way to an affair. I’ve never felt the raw appeal of an affair perhaps like this before. Even more amazing, the film explores an entire neighborhood of characters and breathes life into them. [i]Little Children[/i] feels like a great novel, with a scalpel-sharp narrator offering glimpses into the inner workings of these people. You get a great sense of worth in the film and it’s easy to fall under its spell. [i]Little Children[/i] is a wonderful movie that looks at the complexities of people without judgment but with plenty of sly humor. It’s a fine work of satire and sensuality, and Winslet is becoming so good at delivering powerful performances that she’s being taken for granted as perhaps the best actress of her generation. Nate’s Grade: A This Film Is Not Yet Rated – Filmmaker Kirby Dick is a ballsy man. First, he crafts a rousing journalistic expose on the unimpartial and arcane practices of the Motion Picture Association of America ratings board. Then, and this is genius, he submits his own muckraking documentary to that same board for a rating. Dick’s potent film is ambitious and tries to do too much, touching every topic related to the MPAA it can think of; it practically steamrolls over the ideas of piracy and the fact that a national ratings board eliminates the all-too-likelihood of arbitrary local ratings systems. But Dick squares the MPAA in his sights and his aim is deadly. This is an organization that says it is voluntary and has no editorial control over how movies are made. But how voluntary is it when the NC-17 rating is treated as a commercial kiss of death, where newspapers won’t run ads, video stores won’t carry the film, and advertising is strictly limited? Dick makes brilliant note of the different hypocrisies of the ratings systems. Sex is graded far more harshly than wanton violence, and what’s even worse is homosexual sex. Dick juxtaposes film clips side-by-side, one with heterosexual sex where the film received an R-rating, and the other with homosexual sex where the film received an NC-17 rating. The scenes are nearly identical except for the gender of the people involved. Also, sexual thrusting also seems to get the MPAA’s goat. An animated sequence detailing what is and isn’t allowed in a film per rating is hilarious (you did know you got one “fuck” for a PG-13 as long as it is not in reference to sex, right?). There’s a lot of filmmakers in here to share their MPAA horror stories of what was and wasn’t accountable for taste, and some of it is baffling; Hilary Swank wiping her mouth after going down, off camera, on a girl is the difference between R and NC-17. The MPAA also has a disturbing habbit of grading harshly when it comes to films that show women receiving pleasure through sex. The MPAA is also the only ratings board where its members are kept in secret in an effort, they say, to thwart coercion. Dick hires a private eye, who happens to be a lesbian no less, and together they hunt down the raters and reveal to the public for the first time who these arbitrators of taste really are. MPAA mastermind Jack Valenti said the raters would be comprised of normal parents; well Dick’s film exposes that many on the board have adult children, and some don’t have any kids at all. Plus there are two members of the clergy on this board in an “advisory” function. The film isn’t mean-spirited but is very angry, but it’s an anger that Dick makes sure you understand and relate to. The most astonishing aspect of this documentary is that the MPAA actually listened and is loosening certain rules, allowing filmmakers to cite precedence when arguing for or against their ruling (“Hey, you can stab a guy in an ear with a penis in [i]Scary Movie[/i] but we can’t have two women kiss?”). This is a must-see for film fanatics and those curious how the industry ceded power to a small group of middle-aged homeowners. Nate’s Grade: B+[/color][/font]

Read all 20 featured audience ratings