The NC-17 rating, of course, is a compromise to avoid serious films being given the 'X' rating associated with pornography possessing no artistic value. But having any rating system at all means that filmmakers who want their films to reach a wide audience, and need a wide audience to pay back their backers may feel pressured to compromise their artistic integrity for the sake of getting a more desirable rating, because R-rated films can draw in more movie goers.
The subjective nature of film ratings even under the MPAA is evident when one considers that certain things we take for granted, like nudity, for example, were originally prohibited by the Hayes Commission. Foreign films from nations with different sexual standards, documentaries about important subjects, and other films that contain taboo topics can be effectively censored by being given a NC-17 rating, while violent, major Hollywood blockbusters with little artistic pretentions receive more desirably R-ratings, simply because they do not contain certain hot-button scenes and issues.
Two filmmaking techniques are used to convey the ideological point-of-view of "This Film is Not Yet Rated." One is the common format of many film documentaries, involving interviews with filmmakers and directors and clips from banned and formerly banned films. However, there is also an intriguing 'whodunit' plot. The reviewers used to determine the ratings of the MPAA are supposedly ordinary, anonymous people 'like you and me.' They are supposed to represent America, so their occupations and profiles comprise a variety of perspectives. However, these individuals who wield such influence are unknown. They should be known, according to the film's director, and so he goes on a fact-finding mission. To find out who serves on the ratings board and what criteria by the MPAA is used the director hired and filmed private detectives to track the
What emerges is that the raters are much like Postmaster Hayes. They do not possess unique qualifications to make them the arbiters of American film taste and decency, although violating their privacy by justifying their encroachment upon filmmaker's rights and American's rights seems like a strange concept. The documentary takes delight in showing what elements of sexuality particularly disturb members of the board, spanning from female orgasms to gay sexual intercourse.
The film makes its point, but one cannot help but wonder if in years to come the film rating system will be rated null and void by the Internet, much like premium cable has neutered the Federal Communications Commissions (FCC) prohibitions regarding decent behavior and language on prime time television. Already, young adults and children have access to a much wider variety of content, if their parents do not specifically screen their Internet account, which many parents are loathe to do, more so than they might be to take their teen to an R-rated film. And this greater tolerance of Internet surfing is itself another cultural contradiction, still more evidence of the subjectivity of what constitutes decency and appropriate material for children.
Works Cited
This Film is Not Yet Rated" Directed by Kirby Dick. 2005.
