Isn't it 1 so long as it's not in reference to sexual situations?
Should the MPAA rating system be changed?
- Thread starter miraclefan
- Start date
It also cannot be used in a sexual manner.
Anyone see, This film is not yet rated? it tries to take a look behind the closed doors of the MPAA! It would be funny if the MPAA wasn't so STUPID!
Anyone see, This film is not yet rated? it tries to take a look behind the closed doors of the MPAA! It would be funny if the MPAA wasn't so STUPID!
Great film. The stuff where they were following the MPAA people to learn their identities was funny but the least interesting part. I loved the background on the MPAA and their secretive nature and arbitrary rulings though.
^That was one thing I put in the BBFCs questionnaire on whether I agreed with their ratings or not. I told them I didn't necessarily disagree with any of the ratings, but they kinda seem arbitrary at times. Like The Dark Knight being a 12 and Slumdog Millionaire being a 15. What content difference made them take that decision? If one of them was a 15 then surely both of them should have been, and vice versa.
I find the ratings system (US) to be unhelpful and uninformative. I really shouldn't have to google a movie or a bunch of reviews to find out if there's stuff that's inappropriate for my kids. I like the TV rating system, where it shows why a program is recommended for particular age groups. Of course, ratings don't affect adults' ability to see a movie, so I'm not sure why people who want to see more adult content.
Anyone see, This film is not yet rated? it tries to take a look behind the closed doors of the MPAA! It would be funny if the MPAA wasn't so STUPID!
Great film. The stuff where they were following the MPAA people to learn their identities was funny but the least interesting part. I loved the background on the MPAA and their secretive nature and arbitrary rulings though.
I loved the fact that the MPAA rated the film nc17... effectively killing it.
A
Amaris
Guest
There should only be 4 rating systems:
[K] - KIDS. Kids can see this movie. It has no actual plot, is filled with inane chatter, and has pretty colors. Movies like Spongebob, Hannah Montana and Star Trek Nemesis fall in this category.
[NK] - NOT FOR KIDS. This rating means there will be explicit sex, gore, violence and everything else that makes adults ditch their kids at a babysitter for several hours. Movies like this include SAW, Brokeback Mountain, and Curious George.
[NBK] - NOT FOR BLIND KIDS. This movie may have visuals that are safe, but the audio is disturbing, deficient or lacking in descriptive supplement. This includes movies such as Silent Movie, Wall*E, and just about everything by Michael Bay.
[NFA] - NOT FOR ANYONE. Any movie by Kirk Cameron.
J.
[K] - KIDS. Kids can see this movie. It has no actual plot, is filled with inane chatter, and has pretty colors. Movies like Spongebob, Hannah Montana and Star Trek Nemesis fall in this category.
[NK] - NOT FOR KIDS. This rating means there will be explicit sex, gore, violence and everything else that makes adults ditch their kids at a babysitter for several hours. Movies like this include SAW, Brokeback Mountain, and Curious George.
[NBK] - NOT FOR BLIND KIDS. This movie may have visuals that are safe, but the audio is disturbing, deficient or lacking in descriptive supplement. This includes movies such as Silent Movie, Wall*E, and just about everything by Michael Bay.
[NFA] - NOT FOR ANYONE. Any movie by Kirk Cameron.
J.
What about movies with plenty of both? E.g. women-in-prison movies?
Last edited:
Modern Ratings Classifications are largely designed to maximise movie income rather than guide the public.
The whole silly game of allowing certain numbers of various swearwords or certain durations of gory shots, etc, etc shows how daft the system is.
Really, going by need, you only need two ratings systems - Universal and Adults. All the rest are unnecessary (and probably unfounded in evidence) subdivisions that are more useful for marketing purposes than anything else.
The whole silly game of allowing certain numbers of various swearwords or certain durations of gory shots, etc, etc shows how daft the system is.
Really, going by need, you only need two ratings systems - Universal and Adults. All the rest are unnecessary (and probably unfounded in evidence) subdivisions that are more useful for marketing purposes than anything else.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
I'd say there is room for a mature in there, too. But I do agree the 12A/PG-13 thing at the very least is to maximise profits. Especially given the stuff some 12A films get away with.
This is technically what it is, it would just be a name change.
PG-13 isn't Parental Guidance Suggested for anyone under the age of 13, it's no children under the age of 13.
I think the descriptors (like violence, nudity, etc) are more important than a simple rating, but that's for parents to read and restrict their kids.
Could go either way....
Wrong, as quoted from the MPAA site on this:
Anyone can get into a pg-13 film, no parents needed.
Yes. like I said, MPAA system gone. Bring on the TV system.
Nemesis?
But my need is for a 15 and 18 system as we currently have to keep out chatty brats and screaming children
I think it should be abolished, as should all forms of censorship. If you want to shield yourself from images or ideas, find out what the movie is about first. Don't create blanket rules that affect all of society. The FCC has to go too, or at least be cut back to regulating nothing but what frequencies can be used and by whom.
The FCC has nothing to do with it..
