A Truely Biased Rating System

(For this blog, I also employed an Interview done with Kirby Dick at Sundance [SD Int.] shortly before his film was released. It is located here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ec3awsQXEEY&feature=PlayList&p=B80E931A3778CF3C&playnext=1&playnext_from=PL&index=11

Every time you go to the movies or even turn on HBO, you know what kind of content to expect because of the rating that is tagged to the movie you are about to watch. However, what is not as commonly known by the general public is how these films are rated, re-edited, and eventually, re-rated with a portrayal different than that of what the director originally intended. While this change may not be noticed in the cinema, it does occur and is a very real issue in the movies released today. As Kirby Dick put in an interview with the Sundance Institute, “You wouldn’t ask a writer to change a word; you wouldn’t ask a painter to change a stroke,” so how is it right to ask directors to change their work in order for people to have easier access to it? To answer this plainly, it is not right at all. Some of the biases involved in rating films include not only the church and the parents who want to “protect” their kids (Leff, 276 and 280 resp.), but also the larger studios who have the time and money to deal with complying to the MPAA’s ratings. (SD Int.) Sure, people generally want to shelter their children as much as possible, but do film raters really “have to be parents”? (Glickman Interview) At some point, parents should allow their kids the ability to grow and witness art as it was originally intended without the intent of getting a “decent” rating. Granted that one of the parents’ main concerns is probably sexual content, this may be overly expressed.

Violent films generally get a softer rating than those involving sexual content “because those are the kinds of films the studio makes.” (Dick CNN Interview) This bias in favor of the studio not only hinders content of videos, but also impedes the release of independent film. “Studio films have much more resources” to deal with the MPAA than do independent film makers when they run “completely out of money.” (SD Int.) This poses a real issue because movie watchers never get to view the indie because it was never re-edited to suit the rating board’s demands.

The fact is that film makers do suffer through these issues and biases, and many have “incredible stories of the kinds of thinks they’re asked to change.” (SD Int.) The opinion here is that these biases expressed by these people are real, the critics of these sources are very well minded when speaking harshly of them, and these biases are not going to change unless the viewers do something about them. It is time for the film makers to stop “being at the mercy of this ratings board” (SD Int.) and begin being able to release projects without the MPAA’s notions on “how to change their film; to make their film.” (SD Int.)