highlights the fragile border between "suggested editing" and sexist, homophobic, facist censorship...left with the strong factual evidence that the rating system is arbitrary, unfair, and should be destroyed.
I could have liked this movie more.A special screening with conversation in the theater afterward.Too bad it dragged a bit.Don't get me wrong,it's even truthful than a Fahrenheit perceived on being.Occasionally however there are parts unnecessary of their existence like the investigating team and their subsequent clues.The interviews are pretty much insightful.
the MPAA are a joke... For example I personally find it ridiculous that "Last Tango in Paris" a film about a solely sexual relationship (it's not even visually that explicit) is still rated NC-17, yet "The Passion of the Christ" where a man gets graphically tortured for over two hours is only rated R.
The film itself was interesting but the thing that bothered me was the backwards way directors are thinking. I?m not a religious person or some crazy person bent on censorship so that isn?t fueling me here but I feel that it is the duty of the MPAA to make us aware of what we are viewing and what we are showing to our children and other families. When you look at a classic film something deemed culturally significant that is still being viewed by today?s society and is well known among different generations they almost contained no language, violence, or nudity and nothing made today can even touch them. Its sad people think those things make a good movie. I find a lot of it unnecessary in all departments. I?m not easily offended by any of it but I can see how some people would be and it?s just common courtesy to respect the way people wish to parent their children. Well I guess by today?s standards it?s only acceptable to think about yourself and who cares about other people. The MPAA does us a great duty by reporting what is in a film. I know if I went to see something like Talk to Her with my mother and we got to the part where the man strips down and actually climbs inside a vagina I?d feel awkward and probably embarrassed and if I had children I?d be pissed if someone showed that to them. But I guess you should be able to tell what is going to be in a movie based off of what it?s about right? No, that isn?t always the case. The back of My Own Private Idaho says nothing about either character being a male prostitute and the shit they do, or you could look at Steel Magnolias it?s just a sad little flick about a diabetic girl but I was pretty surprised to see a bunch of naked men in it. I will admit the MPAA has gotten a little out there rating films for ?vampire violence? or ?scary images? but that doesn?t mean they should just stop all together. I mean look at the people who were pissed off about their rating. Boys Don?t Cry had that graphic rape in it which I sure was longer, American Psycho had the 3 way sex thing and was pretty violent just like they said they?re all against violence, The Dreamers well anyone who saw that should know why it got a NC-17 rating. So what if you had to make changes to the film half the time the things you feel you need to cut to get that R rating don?t need to be that long or even in the film at all. I?ve even found the toned down R rated versions of most movies are way better than uncut version the director wanted you to see. Prime example here is Original Sin it was a great little flick when it was rated R but when I bought it I got the unrated version and the sex scenes were so much longer and graphic it made the film a joke and I gave it away. So you take these directors and writers who spent a lot of time coming up with some crazy shit and you tell them no this needs to be cut out of the film to make it more acceptable for people to view and they get pissed. Well I?d want remain anonymous too if I saw what there imaginations were coming up with I don?t want them tailing me and harassing me because I found something a little unsuitable for people to take their kids too. And this thing they say about so many movies not getting made because of the MPAA is crap because if that were the case I would have never had the chance to see I Spit on Your Grave or Shattered Dead because they would have never been made.
I don't have a lot to say about this film, and if I ever want to catch up on my reviews, I'm going to have to shorten a few here and there. I enjoyed this documentary about the MPAA, it's well made and entertaining. I think some of their rating practices are pretty ridiculous, and there need to be some serious changes made. Especially the way that violence gets a pass, while sex is considered the most evil thing ever; and the fact that they treat studio movies with kid gloves, while being particularly harsh on independent films. There needs to be steady and even rules for every film.
But honestly even as a filmmaker, it didn't get my ire up. There are too many other, much bigger problems in the world to truly care about than this. I commend Kirby Dick (who directed the cult-documentary Sick) for tackling the idea and making an entertaining film out of the subject. I particularly liked the bit, where he split screen clips of gay and straight sex scenes, commenting on how they were shot pretty much the same, but how the gay scenes were all rated NC-17, while the straight sex got R's. If you have any interest in knowing how films are rated, this is a documentary worth watching; plus there are a lot of great film clips included.
oh no, you poor directors! someone actually cares what people are watching, and doesn't want them to be blindsided when going to a movie by blatant sex, drugs and violence! gasp!
This is an interesting movie on why things are rated what they are and how film-makers have to keep changing their movies to get the R rating. It makes them pretty upset, too.
One of the best documentaries that I have seen in a very long time, perhaps since Super Size Me. I always knew that the MPAA was crooked but had no idea just how crooked. This film is a must see for any and all movie fans and I can't recommend it enough.
Interesting, but only covers a small part of the problem. The MPAA at least has an NC-17 rating. It's not their fault the wal-marts, blockbusters and major theater chains wont show them. Go after the studios who'd rather sell you an "unrated" dvd instead of allowing the original version to screen.
it's not as eye-opening or informative as it thinks it is. the private investigation stuff seemed like filler. no mention of sweetback?? the filmmaker could have done a bit more research. also, who edited this film? some kid from mctc??
"This Film is Not Yet Rated" gets, of all ratings, an NC-17. Pretty funny, actually. The basics pertaining to the secretive MPAA are covered and the documentary's findings serve as an enlightenment for American citizens, managing to bring up a valid question: By what standards is a movie rated? What's uncovered is surprising, but the US' puritanical background often explains a lot.
Definitely a good and interesting documentary on the MPAA and its hypocrisy. There were some good interviews with some of the most risque directors like John Waters and Matt Stone. It was great to see the differences between how sex scenes between heterosexual partners are treated as opposed to homosexual sex scenes. It is even more hilarious to know that this documentary got an NC-17 rating. Someone needs to keep investigating this MPAA and kick them out of our TVs.
"Well first of all, all teenagers because of the Internet, have seen more hardcore pornography than their parents have seen. They have seen the most hideous things you can find on the Internet believe me. And they've all seen it. What else do you think they're doing? Do you think they're doing their homework upstairs?" Great documentary about the film industry's best kept secret, the MPAA and the hippocrasy about sex and violence in American film. It's a film every film lover should see.
It's very informative, in a really sneaky way, so it's pretty good! Could have been a bit longer though, I felt like it was missing something.. P.S. I also think this is my first official NC-17 movie! Yes!
This film is very one sided. Yet I agree mostly with it. Accept that I don't think ratings are bad, I think the fact that movies work get just distribution in the US if they are NC-17 is bad.
For people who have a relatively extensive knowledge about the film industry, This Film Is Not Yet Rated doesn't offer too many insights or revelations. However, the movie is incredibly important for all those people who might see it and don't know all about the MPAA skull-and-bones society. Because the MPAA is up there with Michael Bay and Calgary Flames of my most hated things in this world, watching them get bitch-slapped by this documentary was a very theraputic and amusing experience. I wasn't taught much, and my eyes only widened in surprise to a couple of statistics or hilariously ridiculous statements made by MPAA heads. However, many people won't have this much knowledge, and I think seeing how this censorship board works will be very informative to them. The movie details the emergence of the MPAA rating board for movies, and how they have since become a major part of the film industry - good, and bad. In fact, the level of control they have over films is frightening. Being given an NC-17 (the rating higher than an R you never see), is much worse than just getting a few less people in theatre seats. Many theatres won't show NC-17 films, many video stores won't carry NC-17 films, and advertising is pretty much thrown out the window. There's a reason this rating is called the "kiss of death" among filmmakers. For years and decades, the MPAA has forced filmmakers to censor and cut and essentially completely change their films so they don't get this dreaded rating (there's also much consternation with PG-13 to R films, but it's not discussed much in this film). Basically, the MPAA has the power to destroy any film - how is this not scary for anyone with a movie camera? By showcasing this hypocrisy, and how the society disguses this horrible censorship with patriotism and a sense of duty to poor American families, director Kirby Dirk waves a big middle finger to them with this movie, and it's a valuable finger to wave. It's such a corrupt system, so ruled and dominated and bought out by the major studios, that it's impossible to get good ratings anymore. So while the movie's message is very important, the flick itself is quite flawed. While visually interesting and often very amusing, there are occasional interviews that go on a bit long and are a little dry, and the stuff involving the private detectives felt sort of like a tangent that was being taken too often. There aren't enough interviews in the film with actual filmmakers, either - they're segments, where directors such as Kevin Smith or Darren Aronofsky or Mary Harron discussing their horror stories involving the MPAA and being forced to cut their films, were by far the most interesting and enlightening parts of the movie. Aronofsky especially gets short-thrift, with only one 30 second interview in the movie, and while he presents an interesting point I'd never thought of before, I would've loved to hear his take on the MPAA's ruling of Requiem for a Dream. So that bothered me a little about the movie, as well as it's lack of a real ending - there is no closure, catharsis, or even just a closing statement; the movie simply ends, abruptly, and I wish there was more there. However, these flaws don't detract from the overall brilliance of the idea of the film, and the balls used to make it. I loved hearing other people say exactly what me and so many others have known for years - why can movies with unrelenting violence be Ok for kids, but movies with an f-word or a bit of pubic hair are banned from them? It's a ridiculous system, and this movie helps try and call a cause to act, even though that'll never happen. One thing I wish someone had mentioned in this movie, though, is how utterly useless the ratings board has become. I don't know what it's like down there in the states, but up here in Canada, if you're 13 and wanna see an R rated movie, you'll have no problem at all. I've seen five year olds in Brokeback Mountain and Rambo, for Christ sakes. The ratings are useless because they're not enforced by anyone except the MPAA, so all they do is wind up making director's destroy their vision for no good cause. Plus, in these days, what kid out there hasn't heard an f-bomb or seen a boob? Sigh. Anyways, I really recommend this movie to anyone planning on making a career in film. It'll be more of a horror movie than any Hostel flicks could be.
As a huge movie lover and hopeful filmmaker, I loved this movie. It goes deep into the process of the MPAA and how they rate movies R and NC-17, and what it takes to get there. Though it is one sided, you have to look at the treatment of independent filmmakers, and how the NC-17 rating really does hurt them. One of the great examples in this movie is "American Psycho", critically acclaimed everywhere, one of my favourite movies, and yet didnt do very well because of the NC-17 rating. Though in Canada the movie didnt even get an R, it just got an 18A. The inconsistencies of the MPAA I imagine are very frustrating for american film connoisseurs, and that is why I am very thankful that I live in Canada where I feel the rating system is much better justified and fair, and there is not a rating that a movie can get over R that places like Blockbuster wont sell.
A fascinating subject that should be brought to the attention of all. I've always wondered why some movies rated R or PG in Canada are rated NC17 in the States. The part that i found most shocking was the involvement of clergy in the process. It's a weird world we live in, what's the difference between saying "fuck" once and saying it 25 times either way the F-Bomb has been dropped.
A very well delivered documentary on a very touchy subject. The film focuses on the overall workings and flaws of the way the MPAA decides on ratings and interviews many of hollywood's most controversial directors. I have noticed from the hundreds of movies I have seen that something is wrong and not consistent from film to film. It mixes humour and facts to show the true power and censorship a rating can have on a film. Worth watching for anyone who can see the true meaning behind violence and sex in films and find the art in it.
MCT:August 30, 2008
MCT:August 5, 2008
MCT:July 31, 2008
MCT:June 28, 2008
MCT:June 22, 2008
MCT:June 13, 2008
MCT:June 1, 2008
MCT:May 14, 2008
MCT:March 11, 2008
