Is The MPAA Asleep At The Switch

I am someone who really likes movies. That is to say, I really enjoy a good movie. I like good, well thought out stories. I'm not one of those people who will say, well, I did like it because of the special effects. In this day and age, I kind of expect good special effects, so to say that a good job was done in that area should be a given these days in my mind, and honestly, I wouldn't care if a movie had substandard visuals, as long as there was a solid story as a base. I really like movies that make me think, where there is something under the surface, for the most part I don't really want to just sit there and be entertained, I would much rather be engaged.

Perhaps that is why one of my favorite movies is "12 Angry Men" with Henry Fonda, which was made in 1957, is in black and white, and nearly the entire movie takes place in a simple Jury Room. There is no question that this movie is 100% story driven, as there are virtually no (possibly none at all) special effects.

That being said, we all, especially if we have kids, look at movie ratings. You know, those letters that accompany all movies, and are set by the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). For anyone who doesn't know, the ratings go like this, G For General Audiences, PG Parental Guidance Suggested as some material might not be suitable for Children, PG13 Parents Strongly Cautioned as some material might not be appropriate for children under 13, R Restricted no one under 17 admitted without a parent or guardian, and finally NC17 which means that no children 17 or under will be permitted under any circumstances. These are general guidelines, and of course, it is understood that different people will have different personal standards, and should take some care for themselves to make sure that they don't take their kids into a movie that is not suitable for them, but still, the guidelines should be reliable, in my opinion.

Lately I have noticed a trend toward rating movies lower than they really should be. For example, the other night my wife and I watched "The Dark Knight" which is the second of the new Batman movies, and a great movie in many respects, but violent and with a lot of adult themes and content. After the movie ended I asked my wife, "what would you think that was rated?" She said, "R, no question about it." So I picked up the case and there it was, "PG13." We were pretty stunned. Another great movie that came out in the past year was "Taken" with Liam Neason, a movie I highly recommend for adults, but again, another movie that deserved and R rating and once again was rated PG13.

On a more extreme note, the last of the Rambo movies, which came out at the beginning of 2008, was rated R by the MPAA, and certainly should have been at least that, but even the producers were surprised when they got back an "R" on their first cut. They had decided to make the movie that they wanted to make, and sent it in to the review board. They expected to receive a rating of NC17, and then follow MPAA guidance to get it down to an R. While they were happy that the initial cut came back with an R, and they didn't have to change anything, they were shocked, because they felt that they had made a movie that went beyond the "R" rating.

Even worse was the movie "Watchmen" which, aside from being one of the most horrible movies I've ever seen, and I'm very sorry I ever saw it, and if anyone ever whips out a DVD of it for you to watch, I have just one word of advice... RUN!!!! But aside from the fact that it is horrible, it was rated R, and there is no question whatsoever that it should have been NC17. On this one there really is no excuse for it having been rated R, being that no one should ever see it, but certainly no child should ever be exposed to a movie such as this.

Now, as I said, the MPAA is supposed to give guidelines, to help you to know how rough a movie is going to be, not to censor it, or to disallow certain aspects of a movie or story, with the exception of what is called hard core porn, or what most people know as X-rated material, which is simply not shown in normal theatres (although parts of Watchmen were certainly pornographic in nature, they did not cross over the line to actual, so-called, hard core porn).

My issue in this post is not with the type of movies that are being made, in a culture such as ours people are free to watch whatever kind of filth they wish to, and like I said, ultimately we are responsible for what movies we see (and believe me, if I had done some research into Watchmen ahead of time when my wife said she wanted to see it, I would have said no, and once I explained what I found she wouldn't have wanted to see it either) I still think that we should be able to trust the guidelines. Since the MPAA purports to evaluate movies and issue guidelines to help us to know which ones are family friendly, and which are not, and to what extent and so on, they should be consistent. I do have a problem with the lowering of standards in movie ratings, because this makes it harder to know what will be appropriate and what will not.

While at this present time the G and PG ratings are still pretty much on the nose, if the current trends continue, which there is no reason to think that they will not, it is only a matter of time before they cannot be trusted either.

I'm not asking the MPAA to adopt all of my standards and restrict what movies are shown, but just be consistent, and give us a fair shot at knowing what movies to see, and what movies to avoid.