Why Parents?

Does a group consisting of 13-15 people rating a film sound probable? In my opinion, I do not know how MPAA got away with this for years. When I first read Dame in the Kimono, I had no background about the whole rating system. Reading it made me realize that the rating system is truly important in the movie industry because it either makes or breaks the movie. After reading Dame in the Kimono, I came to an understanding conclusion that movie rating is a delicate process and that not every movie rating will please people. However, after seeing the video of a CNN interview with director Kirby Dick, the whole idea of movie rating made me speechless.
In Dame in the Kimono, Leff states, “The ratings system had two goals: to ‘encourage artistic expression by expanding creative freedom’ and to ‘insure that the freedom which encourages the artist remains responsible and sensitive to the standards of the larger society’” (274). What started as two goals that were strictly enforced led to controversies that made movie makers crazy. Leff states in his book that “Some thought that the ratings had shackled free expression, others that they had lowered ‘the standards of the larger society’”(280). Although controversies rose, I thought that the idea of movie rating was well accepted because in today’s time, most of people our age are not subjected to the idea of what the rating is in a movie. I never thought about movie rating as big of a deal; like Leff said, “The public nonetheless seems to have accepted classification” (282).
Indeed the public accepted classification of movie ratings. However, did the public know about this secrecy behind MPAA’s movie rating system? From the CNN interview with Kirby Dick, MPAA’s way of movie rating gets leaked out to the public. Simply, 10 random parents from Los Angeles area without formal training rate the movies. They were just hired one day, and got to rate movies. No guidelines were provided, and only their opinions mattered. Out of all the people in America, I have to question, why 10 random “parents”? Leff suggest, “Parents, for whom the ratings were designed, consistently tell pollsters that they support classification” (282).Despite the fact that parents know “best” for their children, I don’t understand the fact why people of all ages (excluding children) don’t get to rate the movies. Also in the CNN interview, they touch upon the subject of “violence” in rating movies. In the interview, they suggest that violent scenes are prone to less harsh ratings than sex scenes. In my opinion, violent scenes are worst than sex scenes.
Along with the idea of parents knowing best for their child, in the interview with Dan Glickman, current head of the MPAA, he suggests that “By large, it works well.” Although parents do know “what’s best for the kids,” there is a generation difference. What parents see as obscene is simply normal in today’s society. People today are accepting towards more adult content material. Glickman also suggests that movie rating is “not censorship, but an informative rating.” From Glickman’s point of view, if the parents rate the movies, then the parents will be informative. Later during the interview, Glickman concludes that “Movie reflects culture of society –don’t try to leave society.” Like he suggests, cultures and generation change; therefore, from my point of view, people from all ages (excluding children) should be able to rate the movies instead of coming from one perspective, parent’s perspective of movies.