In his most recent documentary This Film is Not Yet Rated, Kirby Dick investigates the complex and often contradictory US ratings system and its governing board. The film briefly examines the history of screen censorship in Hollywood, but concentrates on the MPAA and its role in cinema culture. The documentary really comes in two parts; the first covers the politics and inconsistencies in the current system. Dick’s focus is on the notorious NC-17 rating (the highest rating, in which no one under age seventeen can be admitted). This Film is Not Yet Rated looks at what onscreen garners an NC-17, which is quite a controversial issue. It seems that this rating is only used in regard to sex on screen (blood fests and heavy violence will receive an R at most, in which under 17s can view if accompanied by an adult). Anything ‘weird’ is deemed by the MPAA as NC-17 material: oral sex, threesomes, female masturbation and same sex relations. Raters seem to be incredibly harsh on anything non-hetero and without the presence of a male. Dick draws an excellent comparison to illustrate this point: in R-rated American Pie, Jim (Jason Biggs) is seen, bare-arsed thrusting into a freshly baked pie. However, But I’m A Cheerleader depicts Megan (Natasha Lyonne) touching herself over her clothes and is slapped with an NC-17.
Some of Dick’s best footage is his interviews with filmmakers whose work has been branded with the topical rating, such as John Waters (A Dirty Shame), Kevin Smith (Clerks), Jamie Babbitt (But I’m A Cheerleader), Kimberley Peirce (Boys Don’t Cry) and Matt Stone, whose discussion of censorship of puppet sex in Team America: World Police is hilarious. On the more serious side, the affects of the NC-17 on a film are more worrying. These films will not be shown at multiplex chains, so viewers must rely on art house or independent cinemas (which are lacking in Middle America). Similarly, chains such as Wal-Mart will refuse to stock these DVDs.
The other part of This Film is Not Yet Rated is a search to uncover who exactly is on the MPAA’s Rating Board (as until this film was produced, these identities were kept hidden). Dick hires a PI to take the raters, predominantly to see whether or not they actually comply with what the MPAA claims are key criteria for them in order to have a balanced, fair board (members are supposed to be aged within, and have children aged within a certain bracket). As the members are identified, Dick proves this is not the case. Again, this is a definite cause for concern, as it seems an older and somewhat outdated generation are in charge of classifying today’s films (a number of the board’s members are over fifty, childless, and of those who do, their children are aged over 18). This is an alarming result, and proves that the key purpose of the MPAA and Board (supposedly to protect children) is being jeopardised by a group of people and system which is doing anything but.
Who will like it: Definitely of interest to any aspiring filmmakers. Fans of documentaries will enjoy the style of This Film is Not Yet Rated. Similarly, it is surely to please cinema and media students and self-confessed film buffs, and will at least provide interesting party conversation.
What I think: Dick provides a comprehensive look at the current system and why it is not working. His discussion is well-researched and considerably well-structured and backed up. The interviews and his use of animation (to illustrated what sex acts are worthy of NC-17) bring the right amount of humour to the subject. My only criticism was that some of the investigation of the board members with his PI went too far, like digging through their garbage. With a less-invasive documentary style than Michael Moore, Kirby Dick’s handling of the controversial issue of screen censorship will surely intrigue and provoke.
By Steph.
No comments:
Post a Comment