|
THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED Send This Review to a Friend
One of cinema’s most important and relevant documentaries, “This Film Is Not Yet Rated” creatively explores the system under which most of the films released are given ratings. The system amounts to censorship, because producers must take a commercial hit if their films are rated too severely, and the very process necessitates tailoring films to suit the rating board or suffering the commercial consequences. But this film is no dry exposé or analysis. Director Kirby Dick performs the public service of hiring two women detectives to bust the veil of secrecy that the Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) rating board has foisted on the public. It has refused to reveal who is on the board with the excuse of protecting members from pressure.
Think of it. Ratings are not a matter of national security. They aren’t part of the C.I.A. Only classifying movies are involved. The idea of a secret board that wields such wide power and influence goes against the grain of democracy and free speech. The film affords us great fun as we watch the private eyes note license plates, make phone calls to dig up information, listen to conversations in restaurants and ultimately name those on the secret rating board.
Then as the kicker, a copy of the film is sent to the board to be rated. Apart from the damning information, there are sex scenes to illustrate some of the censorship problems. Not surprisingly, the board said the film would get an NC17, a rating that is death, because many theaters won’t book films with that rating (no children under 17 allowed), many newspapers won’t run ads for them and there are video stores that won’t handle them. But true to the filmmaker’s sense of independence, “This Film Is Not Yet Rated” is being released without a rating.
Historical background is provided to explain the origins of the system, film clips are used to show the sort of scenes that are omitted or permitted, and there are interviews with key participants, observers, defenders and critics. Also, it is made clear that the board is more concerned with sex than violence. A revelation that clergymen are involved raises the specter of organized religion contributing to the censorship. There are also charges that independent films are looked upon more stringently than those of the major producing companies that make up the Motion Picture Association. There is an appeals process, but it is depicted as primarily a formality.
The film evades the question of what kind of system, if any, there should be to protect children, and it doesn’t take issue with the whole idea of considering under-17 a demarcation line for “children” Parents seem to want some indication of what would be appropriate for youngsters. But films are not works that can be labeled with ingredients, as with a can of soup. I have consistently refused to apply ratings to my reviews where I’ve been in control, as on this website, as I prefer to let a review speak for itself. Back when the rating system was relatively new, Walter Reade, who refused to use ratings at his theaters, and I debated Jack Valenti of the MPAA , who initiated the system. We argued strenuously to expose it.
This is no ordinary documentary. Because the topic goes to the very heart of contemporary filmmaking, marketing and cultural freedom, it is vital to be seen. Fortunately it is often entertaining as well as illuminating and thought-provoking. An IFC Films release.
|