Motion Picture Association film rating system

The MPAA film rating system is a system used in the United States and territories and instituted by the Motion Picture Association of America to rate a movie based on its content. It is one of various motion picture rating systems used to help patrons decide which movies may be appropriate for children and/or adolescents.

In the United States, the MPAA rating system is the most recognized system for classifying potentially offensive content, but it is usually not used outside of the film industry because the MPAA has trademarks on each individual rating.

Current ratings

The current MPAA movie ratings consist of:

Image	Text
G rating symbol G rating symbol	Rated G—General audiences All ages admitted.
PG rating symbol PG rating symbol	Rated PG—Parental guidance suggested Some material may not be suitable for children.
PG-13 rating symbol PG-13 rating symbol	Rated PG-13—Parents strongly cautioned Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13.
R rating symbol R rating symbol	Rated R—Restricted Under 17 requires accompanying parent or legal guardian.
NC-17 rating symbol NC-17 rating symbol	Rated NC-17 No one 17 and under admitted. Also called "Youth Restricted Viewing.

If a film has not been submitted for a rating, the label "NR" (Not Rated) is often used; however, NR is not an official MPAA classification. Films that have not yet received MPAA classification, but are expected to, are often advertised with the notice "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" or "Rating Pending".

History

Origins

The MPAA film rating system was instituted on November 1, 1968, as a response to complaints about the presence of sexual content, graphic violence, scatology, and profanity in American film following the MPAA revisions to the Production Code of America in 1965. Although the revisions allowed a designation of "SMA - Suggested for Mature Audiences," along with the Code seal, this warning was hardly very descriptive and its enforcement was far from standardized. (Please see related article Green Sheet for information about a related precursor to the ratings system.) The United States came rather late to motion picture rating, as many other countries had been using rating systems for decades.

The erosion of the film production code had several effects: while it allowed for certain kinds of artistic movies like Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho (1960) to be filmed, it also sparked a rise in low budget exploitation films that became more and more explicit in their sexual and violent content.

In 1967, two movies (Ulysses and I'll Never Forget What's'isname) were released containing the word "fuck" in their dialogue. This precipitated the public demand for the reintroduction of self-regulation. After a series of meetings with government representatives, the Motion Picture Association of America and National Association of Theatre Owners agreed to provide a uniform ratings system for all of its constituents' movies, a system that would be theoretically enforced by the film exhibitors. Film production companies which were not members of the MPAA were unaffected, and the ratings system had no official, governmental enforceability due to the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as interpreted in regards to matters of sexuality, violence, and profanity in the media dating back to 1952's Joseph Burstyn, Inc v. Wilson decision.

Original ratings

The original movie ratings (in use 1968–1970) consisted of:

Rated G: Suggested for General Audiences. All ages admitted.
Rated M: Suggested for Mature Audiences. Parental discretion advised.
Rated R: Persons under 16 are not admitted unless accompanied by parent or adult guardian (age limit may vary in certain areas).
Rated X: Persons under 17 not admitted (age limit may vary in certain areas).

Orginally the X rating wasn't trademarked, under the plan, anyone not submitting his or her film for rating could self apply the X or any other symbol or description, except those trademarked by the rating program. The original plan had been to use only three rating categories, ending with R. Some newspaper advertisements clearly show that ages on advertising even for R- and X-rated films would occasionally be altered to read 18 instead of 17. Other local boards (involved in the early negotiations of the rating system) even wished to classify the age as high as 21 or 25, depending on the board.

The M rating gets replaced

Many parents were confused as to whether films rated M contained more mature content than those rated R; especially because during the pre-rating years of 1965 to 1968, an earlier form of crude classification allowed more content to be included so long as the film's advertising bore the notation "Suggested for Mature Audiences" (often abbreviated as "SMA"). This confusion led to its replacement in 1970 by the designation GP:

Rated GP: for General Patronage/ Parental Guidance Suggested/Guidance from Parents

Age problems with the R and X ratings

At the same time (1970) the ages on the R and X ratings were increased from 16 to 17 (where the R rating has remained ever since), although the age on the X rating would still vary in certain jurisdictions until it was officially changed to an NC-17. Some newspaper advertisements clearly show that ages on advertising even for R- and X-rated films would occasionally be altered to read 18 instead of 17. Other local boards (involved in the early negotiations of the rating system) even wished to classify the age as high as 21 or 25, depending on the board.

The GP rating gets replaced

By 1972, a number of problems with the GP rating emerged. First, the rating now sounded too permissive, and was not indicative of the film's actual content. During 1971 the MPAA experimented with designating some GP films with a special warning label. The exact wording would vary, but this label would generally read "Contains material not generally suitable for pre-teenagers" and thus was an early form of PG-13 rating. Since this added message was referred to with an asterisk next to the GP symbol, this brief rating can be called GP*. However, the percentage of GP* films quickly grew to outnumber GP films with no special advisory, and in early in 1972, as part of an overall standardization of the rating symbols as used in promotional material, both GP and GP* were redesignated with the new PG rating that would then be used throughout most of the 1970s.

Rated PG: Parental Guidance Suggested—Some Material may not be Suitable for Pre-Teenagers

Today the rating reads:

Rated PG Parental Guidance Suggested

Some material may not be suitable for children.

From the adoption of the system through the mid-1970s, it was not uncommon for mainstream films such as Airport, Planet of the Apes, The Green Berets, The Odd Couple, Tora! Tora! Tora! and 2001: A Space Odyssey to be released with G ratings, but by 1978 (with increasing use of the phrase "children" rather than "pre-teenagers" on the PG rating), the G rating had become increasingly associated with films intended specifically for children, while the PG rating became increasingly acceptable for designating "family" films. Most of the G-rated films from the early years of the rating system contain content equivalent to stronger (PG and PG-13) ratings used in later years.

By the late 1970s, the PG ratings on some films were reworded, and the pre-teenagers phrase became used less frequently, with the word children substituted instead. An analysis of the proportion of films rated G and PG at this time (corresponding with a conservative shift in the rating standards) shows that fewer G ratings were issued while more family films were rated as PG with the less restrictive sounding "children" label. No clear system of applying either label was known to be a part of MPAA policy during the late 1970s, but by the early 1980s, the phrase "pre-teenagers" became little used, and in 1984 the PG-13 rating was established and effectively restored the clear distinction (see GP and GP* above) between films with lighter and heavier content levels. Interestingly, the last mega-marketed, non animated (and non family oriented) big studio film with a G rating was Star Trek: The Motion Picture in December 1979. This was also the time period when live action Disney productions, such as The Black Hole, The Watcher in the Woods, and The Devil and Max Devlin, began to routinely receive PG ratings.

By this time, the familiar standardized boxes with boldfaced text, the MPAA logo, and the explanatory message underneath were now in common use.

The addition of the PG-13 rating

Prior to 1984, when three films associated with Steven Spielberg triggered calls for yet another addition to the list of ratings, other films had been released that suggested there needed to be a middle ground between PG and R. The summer of 1982 featured Poltergeist, which was highly frightening for a PG-rated film (yet not severe enough for an R). [1] Violent scenes in the 1984 PG-rated films Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom (which he directed) and Gremlins (which he produced), were the final straws. Public outcry about the violence led Spielberg to suggest a new PG-13 rating to Jack Valenti, who conferred with theater owners and then introduced the new rating on July 1. The rating still allowed children under 13 to be admitted without a parent or guardian, but it cautions parents about potentially shocking violence or other offensive content, although not as offensive as an R rating. The first movie to gain widespread theatrical release with a PG-13 rating was 1984's Red Dawn (although the first to receive the classification was The Flamingo Kid). It took a year for the PG-13 logo to shift into its current form. The initial rating, instead of using a line of boldface text followed by explanatory description below, bore the wording:

Rated PG-13: Parents are strongly cautioned to give special guidance for attendance of children under 13. (1984–1986)

Today the rating reads:

Rated PG-13 PARENTS STRONGLY CAUTIONED. Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13. (1986–Present)

With the PG rating still being used without a change, it was unclear to some parents at first whether PG or PG-13 films were intended for older viewers. Until 1990, some of the same content that prompted the creation of the PG-13 rating was still being observed in some PG films. For example Big, Beetlejuice, and Nothing in Common were three late 1980s widespread PG releases that contained "the F word" in their dialogue. The ratings board reacted quickly to parental protests, and over the next couple of years, the number of PG-13 films finally outnumbered the number of PG releases, as standards were tightened for PG classification. Around the turn of that decade, standards were also tightened for PG-13 films, at least for violence, as the ratings board became more likely to issue an R rating for violence that involved bloodshed and/or the slaying of policemen. Except for a brief reversal in 1994, the number of PG-13 films has outnumbered the number of PG films ever since, and the proportion of R-rated films (starting with the boom of home video product in the late 80s) has generally increased at the expense of unrestricted films. Only within the last two years has there been an indication that the proportion of restricted films has started to decrease slightly, as a trend. Since these proportions tend to reflect the strictness of ratings criteria, this trend refutes false claims that so-called "ratings creep" (see below) occurred during the 1990s. This, however, is also questioned, as studios often edit films that are given provisional R ratings. (All firsthand original data contradicts that study, which used only secondary data in an invalid manner.)

The PG-13 rating was adapted into the similar PC-13 rating by ID Software for their game Wolfenstein 3-D, but fell quickly into disuse.

X is replaced by NC-17

In the early years of the ratings system, X-rated movies such as Midnight Cowboy (1969) and A Clockwork Orange (1971) could win Oscar nominations and awards. But the rating, which was not trademarked by the MPAA (as were its other ratings), was self applied by the "adult entertainment" segment of the industry to the point where an X rating could be included in advertising gimmicks and came to be equated strictly with film pornography, which was never the intent behind the original rating. This concern led to a large number of newspapers and TV stations refusing to accept ads for X-rated movies, and some theaters' landlords forbade exhibition of X-rated movies. Such policies led to a compromise with the distributors of George Romero's 1978 horror film Dawn of the Dead: the audience restriction would be enforced by participating NATO theaters, but the letter "X" itself would not appear in the film's advertisements or displays, a message instead being substituted: "There is no explicit sex in this picture; however, there are scenes of violence which may be considered shocking. No one 17 and under will be admitted." After all, the MPAA stresses the voluntary nature of the system and denies that the rating system should cause a film not to receive widespread release. Various horror films, such as the sequel Day of the Dead and Re-Animator were marketed in this fashion. Some, like the horror parody Evil Dead 2 had actually earned an adults only rating at some point, while others like Guardian of Hell or Zombie may have used such messages in addition to their R ratings (which were sometimes surrendered specifically for marketing purposes).

The MPAA introduced the NC-17 (No Children Under 17 Admitted) rating on September 27, 1990, to finally make an official and standardized classification that could allow these films to be distributed with the MPAA seal. Part of this calculation was that the adult XXX markets tended to have no reason to pay the fee to submit their product by that point (since the films were distributed either through independent theaters or simply direct to video), and a differentiation could therefore be inferred by viewers that MPAA rated NC-17 films were legitimate motion pictures with actual stories and developed characters, as with the first such film, Universal Pictures' Henry & June (1990), rather than merely prurient/pornographic fare.

Some media outlets which refused ads for X-rated titles viewed ads for NC-17 rated films as equally unsuitable, despite studio claims, and thus simply transferred that policy to NC-17 titles, as did many theater landlords. A number of social conservative groups placed pressure on large video chains including Blockbuster Video and Hollywood Video, as a result of which these chains do not stock NC-17 titles. However, similar and even more controversial sexual and violent product is often carried by these chains so long as no such rating was officially connected with its packaging.

Later, in 1996, the age for the NC-17 category was subtly increased by one year by changing the wording from "No Children Under 17 Admitted" to "No One 17 And Under Admitted." The label NC-17 stayed even though the words it represents, the letter "C" no longer stands for "Children", that was replaced by the word "One."

While a number of movies have been released with the NC-17 rating, none of them have been a major boxoffice hit. In a bold attempt to broaden the acceptance of NC-17 rated films towards the moviegoing public, United Artists marketed its big budget Showgirls heavily, with splashy TV and print ads. The film became the first (and, to date, only) NC-17 rated film to open in wide release, on 1,388 screens. But the critically savaged film's poor box office performance only created a larger stigma towards the rating, deeming any film rated NC-17 as being "box office poison". An acclaimed film, Requiem for a Dream in which the lead actress, Ellen Burstyn, was nominated for the Academy Award for Best Actress in the 2000 Academy Awards, was released unrated rather than go out with the stigma of an NC-17 rating. The MPAA threatened to give the film the NC-17 rating due to a montage at the climax of the film involving a graphic orgy/party scene. Although the scene is quite explicit by today's standards, many protested it was very necessary to the entire message of the movie, which should be seen by teenagers under the 17 age limit to give them "an educational wake-up call" on the negative effects of drugs. Even though the purpose of the film was to show the realities of drug addiction, the MPAA stood by their decision by refusing to give the film an R rating on appeal. The NC-17 rating has more recently been limited to films considered to appeal to a limited "art house" audience, where the limited distribution and advertising of such films is not considered a major obstacle.

The majority of NC-17 fare is still released theatrically either in an edited R-rated version, or with its rating surrendered. Every five years or so, a mainstream release, such as The Dreamers, will be attempted by a large studio. Most commonly, however, the NC-17 version gets distributed on home video as "Not Rated", or where its rating is difficult for the average patron to notice on the packaging.

The rating process

While the MPAA does not publish an official list of all the exact words, actions, and exposed body parts used to determine a movie's rating, as this would be considered tantamount to self-censorship, some guidelines can be derived based on the MPAA's actual rating decisions:

If a film uses "one of the harsher sexually derived words" (such as fuck) 1-3 times, it is routine today for the film to receive a PG-13 rating, provided that the word is used as an expletive and not with a sexual meaning (this was mentioned in Be Cool, when Chili Palmer complains about the movie industry. Humorously, "fuck" is said only in that scene, giving the movie a PG-13). An example of a film that might suggest this criteria is flawed is Waiting for Guffman, which contains mostly PG-13 (some could even argue PG) content, yet is rated R because a man auditioning for a role uses fuck (the only time it is spoken in the movie), in a sexual sense. Exceptions may be allowed, "by a special vote of the ratings board" where the board feels such an exception would better reflect the sensibilities of American parents. A couple of exceptions were noted: rare films such as Guilty by Suspicion were allowed as many as 9 uses of the word; probably due to the precedent set in the 1970s by politically important films such as All the President's Men. It is a common misconception that if a movie uses "fuck," in a nonsexual context, more than once, it will automatically receive an R rating. In reality, PG-13 movies are routinely allowed two or three uses.
A reference to drugs, such as marijuana, usually gets a movie a PG-13 rating at a minimum. A well known example of an otherwise "PG movie" getting a PG-13 for a drug reference is Whale Rider. The film contained only mild profanity, but received a PG-13 because of a scene where drug paraphernalia was briefly visible. Critic Roger Ebert criticized the MPAA for the rating and called it "a wild overreaction." [2]
A "graphic" or "explicit" scene of illegal drug use will earn a film at least a PG-13 rating and, especially in the case of "hard drugs," even an R rating.
If a film contains strong sexual content, it usually receives an R rating. The film Lost in Translation had a scene in a strip club that had brief topless nudity and a song in the background that repeated the phrase "sucking on my titties." The scene was brief and the rest of the film had PG-13 level content, but the film still received an R rating. In the case of I Capture the Castle, a shot of a topless woman got the film an R rating "for brief nudity." In every other country with a similar ratings system (such as the UK, Australia, and Canada), the film received an equivalent of G or PG.
If a film contains male rear nudity, it is more likely to be given a lower rating than if the nudity were female. Male nudity is generally regarded as ribald (i.e. mooning) or natural, whereas female nudity is generally regarded as sexual.
Films that have legitimate historical or educational value are often granted leniency. Some have argued that the level of violence in Saving Private Ryan merited an NC-17, but that the film was given leniency because it was a historical war movie. This argument also came up when The Passion of the Christ was released without cuts, with an R-rating.
Violence which includes bloodshed will usually receive an R rating, while bloodless violence will be rated PG-13 (eg. Alien vs. Predator, the "unrated version" contains the same contentas the PG-13 version in terms of violence however, every violent scene includes bloodshed)

Ratings criteria is intended to reflect changing norms and compromises between the diverse needs and rights of various interests in a large and complex modern society. Therefore, an evaluation of ratings criteria must specify what year or approximate period of time is being referred to, when modeling the standards relevant to each film classification.

Members of the MPAA's Classification and Rating Administration, which consists of a demographically balanced panel of parents, view the movie, discuss it, and vote on the film's rating. If the movie's producer is unhappy with this rating, he/she can reedit the film and resubmit it, or can appeal to an Appeals Board. Appeals generally involve a film which was rated R for which the producer is seeking to have the rating changed to PG-13, or a film rated NC-17 for which the producer is seeking to have the rating changed to R.

Effects of ratings

Legally, the rating system is entirely voluntary. However, signatory members of the MPAA (major studios) have agreed to submit all of their theatrical releases for rating, and few mainstream producers (outside the pornography niche) are willing to bypass the rating system due to potential effects on revenues. Therefore, it can be argued that the system has a de facto compulsory status in the industry. Most films released unrated nowadays are either relatively obscure independent films, foreign films, direct-to-video films, made-for-TV films or documentaries not expected to play outside the arthouse market, or large format films (which typically contain minimal offensive content and generally receive a G or PG rating when they are submitted for a rating).

One of the unintended side effects of the rating system is that the G and (in recent years) PG ratings have been associated with children's films and are widely considered to be commercially bad for films targeted at teenagers and adults. For example, the 2004 action/adventure film Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow, which was not targeted at children, received a PG rating, which some believe caused it to underperform at the box office as preteens and teenagers may have brushed it off as a kiddie flick. [3] On the other hand, the R rating also has a negative effect on the box office performance, due to common social and cultural controversies. In fact, most R rated films released in the 1990s generated a box office revenue of less than $100 million. [4]

While some may debate the degree to which any such things are truly unintended, since the ratings now have a clearly established use as part of the marketing strategy for a film, the whole question of children tending to scorn "unchallenging" G or PG fare in favor of whatever they can get away with seeing is a legitimate criticism of an age based rating system. Most R and NC-17 fare is not aimed at older adults, but at a high school and college age market eager to engage in what they perceive as mature activities. Thus, the pretense that offensive content can be considered "adult" serves as a misleading marketing strategy to attract a youthful audience, often for purely sensational and provocative content for its own sake.

The minimum age for unaccompanied patrons at R films, and all patrons at X films, was originally set at 16. By 1970 it was raised to 17 (in some areas the age may be higher still—often 18—but in rare cases as high as 21). Theater owners could still allow children between 13 and 16 years of age into R-rated films without being accompanied by an adult since the rating system is technically voluntary and does not have the force of law behind it. Attendance at films with strong enough content to merit an NC-17 rating could be restricted by law due to the possibility of being considered obscene.

In the 1970s the East Coast based Century theater chain used its own rating system, with only three categories instead of four: For All Ages, For Mature Audiences, and No One Under 17 Admitted, with most, but not all, R-rated films receiving the middle designation, under which no age limits were enforced. In 2000, due to issues raised by Senator Joseph Lieberman, the National Association of Theater Owners, the major trade association in the U.S., announced it would start strict enforcement of ID checks for R and NC-17 rated movies; however, only a small percentage of cinemas (as of 2005) are doing so.^{[citation needed]}

Many retailers of videos, especially Wal-Mart, tend to restrict the sale of R rated movies to minors. POS systems are set up to prevent a transaction without a sales associate checking an ID.

The 2001 independent film L.I.E. challenged its NC-17 rating and waged a publicity campaign against the arbitrary nature of the ratings system. Lot 47, the film's distributor, lost its appeal, and released the film unrated. With the recent success of another NC-17 film, The Dreamers, some film producers and directors hope that the rating may begin to lose some of its stigma and more movie theaters will consider playing such films. Earlier, the NC-17 rated Kids waged a similar campaign, part of which included exhibiting the film to persons under 18 and publishing their (generally favorable) reactions to it. Another film to successfully challenge its NC-17 rating was the cult classic 1994 comedy Clerks., which eventually garnered an R rating. Director Kevin Smith geared up for another MPAA battle when the sequel, Clerks 2 was released, but was surprised and relieved when the MPAA passed it uncut with an R-rating.

Earlier in the rating system, African-Americans complained that rating criteria was too heavily biased against inner city conditions and dialects. For his 1971 film Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song, director Melvin Van Peebles came up with a winning ad slogan ("Rated X by an All-White Jury") that proved successful with the urban market. The revision of the ages upward corresponded with a slackening of standards that generally allowed most such product to receive an R rating thereafter.

Since the rapid expansion of the home video market in the late 1990s, studios have been known to skirt the rating system and release unrated versions of films on videocassette and DVD. Sometimes these versions would have earned an NC-17 if submitted for rating, but often their unrated status is merely for marketing purposes. Films that have been rated PG-13 in their theatrical run are sometimes extended with footage equivalent to an R (but not NC-17) rating and marketed as "unrated" with the implication that the added unrated material is racier than an R rating would permit. For example, one DVD release of American Pie, rated R in its theatrical release, exclaims on the box, "UNRATED! The Version You Couldn't See In Theaters". Sometimes the difference between an R-rated feature and its unrated home video counterpart is as little as a few seconds, while other unrated video editions add scenes that have no sexual or violent content whatsoever, making them "unrated" in the technical sense even though they don't contain more provocative material than the theatrical version (examples of this would be Unleashed). A number of filmmakers have also taken to filming additional footage specifically for video or DVD release, with no intention of submitting this material to the MPAA.

Some foreign and independent films do not bother to submit to the rating system, reasoning that they will not be distributed widely beyond their arthouse audience, so the expense is unnecessary. Canadian films use the American system to an extent as well. The commercials for the movie often use the same ratings that the American ones do, and when the movie is released on video, if it has a rating on it, it has contains the American rating as well as the rating given to the film in which it is being distributed.

Critics of the system

The movie rating system has had a number of high profile critics. Film critic Roger Ebert argues that the system places too much emphasis on not showing sex while allowing the portrayal of massive amounts of gruesome violence. Moreover, he argues that the rating system is geared toward looking at trivial aspects of the movie (such as the number of times a profane word is used) rather than at the general theme of the movie (for example, if the movie realistically depicts the consequences of sex and violence). He has called for an A (adults only) rating, to indicate films high in violence or mature content which should not be marketed to teenagers, but do not have NC-17 levels of sex (or that rating's cachet).

Perhaps with these objections in mind, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops' Office for Film and Broadcasting (a descendent of the formerly influential National Legion of Decency) maintains its own film classification system, which takes the overall "moral tone" (according to its point of view) of a film into account, rather than focusing on content alone.

Many critics of the MPAA system, especially independent distributors, have charged that major studios' releases often receive more lenient treatment than independent films, although it should be noted that the independently distributed film The Passion of the Christ received an R rating despite graphic depictions of violence. It is widely assumed that Saving Private Ryan, with its intense depiction of the D-Day invasion of Normandy, would have earned an NC-17 if it were not a Steven Spielberg film. The comedy Scary Movie, released by a division of The Walt Disney Company's Miramax Films, contained "strong crude sexual humor, language, drug use and violence" but was rated R, to the surprise of many reviewers and audiences; by comparison, the comparatively tamer porn spoof Orgazmo, an independent release, contained "explicit sexual content and dialogue" and received an NC-17.

Ironically, before its purchase by Disney, Miramax heads Bob and Harvey Weinstein often clashed with the MPAA, proclaimed the rating system unfair to independents, and released some films unrated to avoid an X or NC-17. Orgazmo director Trey Parker's ratings battles later inspired the (R-rated) film South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut, which directly criticized the MPAA and holds the Guinness world record for most profanity and violence in an animated feature (399 profane words, 128 offensive gestures and 221 acts of violence).

Another criticism of the ratings system involves the vagary concerned with film content relating to the difference between the PG-13 and R ratings. Many critics (professional, the general public and religious and moral groups) believe that the content of recent PG-13 films equals that of R-rated films from the 1970s, 1980s and early 1990s. For example, depictions of sexual content, violence, profanity and other objectionable content in a PG-13 film from the late 1990s on may have been considered "R level" in the 1970s and 1980s. Critics of film content seem to want that standard to continue despite shifting cultural norms about what is socially acceptable. Many believe the focus of the debate should be whether the sexual content of a film is meant to be an interpretation of an important social issue (teen pregnancy, sexually transmitted disease) or simply entertainment or exploitation, possibly to boost ticket sales among a specific age group.

Some other problems include odd ratings for movies. For example, most horror films that do not contain extreme graphic violence can get a PG-13 rating, whereas Kung Fu Hustle, an action-comedy movie with unrealistic, "animated" violence and minimal coarse language in the Cantonese version with English subtitles, gained an R rating, although the PG-13 rated movies are generally more realistically graphic.

Other critics have argued that the sexual (and to a lesser extent, drug and profanity) standards for movie ratings are ideologically biased in favor of socially conservative values. They generally advocate allowing more slack in such categories as nudity and four-letter words, while maintaining the current rules for violence ratings.

However amdist the critics, Nationwide scientific polls, conducted each year by the Opinion Research Corporation of Princeton, New Jersey, have consistently given the rating program high marks by parents, that 76% of parents with children under 13 found the ratings to be "very useful" to "fairly useful" in helping them make decisions for the moviegoing of their children.

On the evidence of the polls, the rating system would not have survived if it were not providing a useful service to parents.

Stephen Farber's internal critique

One internal critic of the early workings of the system was film critic and author Stephen Farber, who interned with the CARA for six months in its early years (1969–1970). His experiences with the board prompted him to write a book, The Movie Ratings Game (Public Affairs Press), which documented how, even in its earliest days, the board used many of the same tactics that persist to this day: the wielding of the X rating as a way to remove material from films that board members took personal affront to, the lopsided way sexual material was handled relative to violence, and later on the use of psychological jargon to justify placing certain films, even unexplicit ones, in restricted categories on the basis of theme alone. For example, an antiwar themed movie such as The Revolutionary were given a GP rating by the board, but later board members wanted an R simply because it was antiwar.

Farber contended that the ratings board used its power to "punish" the most challenging, creative, and interesting movies being made—A Clockwork Orange, Midnight Cowboy—while "rewarding" more conservative, uncontroversial films with more open ended ratings. Farber also contended that the ratings board's stance about the ratings being used as guidelines to protect children was hypocritical in light of the fact that most of the severities imposed on certain films seemed less borne of their potential impact on children than on reactions to them by parents. He registered great annoyance with the board when they rated the film Woodstock R, pointing out that the original festival had no age restrictions and that it seemed hypocritical to age-restrict the film (which was arguably a far less traumatic experience than the festival itself).

Another still-current problem Farber cited was how the threat of a restrictive rating was wielded freely by the board as a way to force studios to tone down submitted films; he cited a number of movies that were re-cut to not only be removed from the X category (sometimes going as far as two rating brackets to GP), but to be moved from R to GP, or even GP to G. This extended to screenplays submitted to the board as well, which were analyzed and given a projected rating; he used as an example the film The Panic in Needle Park, the script for which was given an X based on its vulgar dialogue and many references to shooting heroin. (The released film was rated R.)

Farber recommended that the X rating either be abolished or relabeled to "A" or "AO", but leaned towards the former on the grounds that the R rating really ought to be the most restrictive rating for a film in an enlightened society. He concluded by endorsing public pressure and activism as being the best way to proceed: "The rating system is certainly not going to be reformed from within ... In the era of the silent majority, a great deal can be accomplished by a little noise."

Rating creep

"Rating creep" is a concern of parents and watchdog agencies, but is actually an oversimplification or outright myth. While it is possible to show how some categories of content have received more restrictive ratings in the past (particularly in general trends for the inclusion of profanity), the reverse is also true (as is the case with older "PG" rated films containing nudity), and it is only with artificially narrow comparisons that a case for ratings creep can be successfully made. Although most of the standards of the MPAA ratings board have become increasingly conservative since 1990, large budget studio films in particular have used their knowledge of ratings criteria (and their ability to afford resubmitting edited films until the desired rating is obtained) has allowed the "packing" of increasing amounts and severity of objectionable material into each rating category, but usually through clever writing and filmmaking techniques that bend the intentions rather than violate the clear standards of the ratings board.

A systematic content analysis since the start of the rating system will show that ratings creep since 1990 is more concerned with an increase in the quantity of content allowed within each category, rather than any true stretching of the ratings board. The type of gruesome violence routine in many of the M, GP, GP* and PG films of the late 1960s and early 1970s, has caused many of them to recently be revised to an R by the board. Therefore, while certain trends can be found, they are not uniformly in the direction of permissive rating creep. Many films from the early days of the rating system have since been reclassified with a stronger rating. Excluding family films, many of these old G-rated films would receive a PG or PG-13 rating today.

On the issue of drug use and violent content that includes visible blood (especially in the light of post-Columbine congressional scrutiny) the current rating system is possibly more conservative than it has ever been. It is more conservative about nudity as well, particularly for films of the late 1960s to mid-1970s, including THX 1138 which in its original 1971 release received a GP-rating, is now rated R for "some sexuality/nudity."[5]

Even the crudest of systematic surveys will show this, especially when including those films recently reevaluated and rated R (Vanishing Point, A Man Called Horse, The Good The Bad and the Ugly, Psycho, etc.) that had previously been classed with unrestrictive advisory ratings (M, GP, GP*, and PG) in the 1960s and the 1970s. It would be unthinkable for Bonnie and Clyde (originally pre-MPAA with "SMA" advisory, then rated M in 1969) to be rated anything but R today, but in the early days of the rating system, it, and many comparably rated violent films, were routinely rated M, GP, GP*, and PG. "The War of the Worlds" (1953) was later rated G because it had no cursing or sex, however it contained people bursting into flames and people fist fighting. Even 1981's Raiders of the Lost Ark contained explicit violence and gore (including a gruesome and realistic shot of a man being shot in the head), and seemed to be the first film to prompt widespread use of the phrase "graphic violence" by film reviewers.

Early James Bond films released in the 1960s and 1970s that could possibly be revised to a PG-13, were recently reprocessed under the old "rating symbol changed" clause rather than officially reviewed in a manner that may cause their traditional M, GP, and PG ratings to be revised upward.

Soldier Blue was considered to contain one of the most repulsive massacre sequences the ratings board had seen, but a version of it with nearly all the violence of the original, and full frontal nudity during a sexual assault scene, was allowed a PG rating in its 1974 rerelease, due in part to its historical and antiviolent intentions. Billy Jack, Vanishing Point and The Getaway are good examples of the light treatment given to sexual assaults and gratuitous female nudity during the 1970s, when it was routine for women's tops to be visibly torn off as shown through the 1970s and early 1980s in films such as The Outlaw Josey Wales and The Beastmaster. The "cut off the bra" scene in Billy Jack became so notorious that many theaters pointed their projectors slightly low to keep the actress's nipple area offscreen. Conversely, others pointed it slightly high so there was no doubt it would be seen.

Strong levels of bloody violence could also be routinely seen in shocking sequences such as those contained in William Friedkin's Sorcerer or at the end of the 1976 horror film Burnt Offerings. The film Poltergeist is also a famous example, and had to be appealed from an R to a PG. The rating board took pride in releasing the politically relevant 1976 film All the President's Men with a PG rating (and a special advertising advisory) although it contained numerous uses of sexually derived words. There is no category of content for which a claim can clearly be demonstrated that ratings creep has occurred except during certain small segments of the period since 1988 in which many such "creeps" have been halted or even reversed.

The notion of "ratings creep" is appealing to watchdog agencies who desire increasingly restrictive classifications. The notion was "legitimized" by a recent but flawed study - On June 13, 2004, the Harvard School of Public Health released a study claiming that "rating creep" was documented by an analysis of content listed on film advisory sites such as "Kids in Mind" and "Screenit." Their claim that more adult content is allowed in films at a given rating than was allowed in the past was based on the indefensible assumption that the standards used by those web sites did not change over the time period in question, and that any discrepancy between web reviewers and the official ratings must therefore be due to changes in the ratings system. This unsupportable assumption nullifies all of the quantitative work included in the study. [6] Although the web sites provided more detailed information about profanity and other film content, the Harvard researchers ignored such data and instead compared only crude summary data to the MPAA categories, without any assurance that the web summary data categories had means of assuring consistency. An actual content analysis of films during that period demonstrates that the MPAA ratings criteria remained strict, while the claims of the web reviewers grew increasingly sensitive and exaggerated (to the point of listing hugs and "shirtless boys playing basketball" as potentially offensive sensual content!)

References

Farber, Stephen (1972). The Movie Ratings Game. Public Affairs Press. ISBN 0818301813.

MPAA: Ratings History

External links

MPAA Film Ratings website
Searchable Ratings Database
MPAA rating history and how it works by Jack Valenti
"G-rated movies favor boys, a new study says". The Boston Globe. February 9, 2006. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
"101 G-rated movies". The Boston Globe. February 8, 2006. {{cite news}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)