The second DVD in as many movie reviews, this time because the movie for all practical purposes could only be seen on home video anyway. As the title suggests, This Film Is Not Yet Rated has not been rated, meaning it will not be shown in most theater chains. Kirby Dick’s documentary sets out to explore and expose the ratings board of the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), the secretive group of supposedly typical Americans who decide whether a movie gets a G, PG, PG-13, R, or NC-17 rating. The exploration of the ratings process, though, is stymied by the top secret nature of the ratings board. As a result, This Film Is Not Yet Rated ends up being primarily about the identity of the board members and only secondarily about how the process works. This is a shame, because I think it’s much more interesting to look at why vivisection gets a PG-13 and a naked woman gets an R. I would also like to hear about how movie ratings are handled in other countries. Instead, Dick is forced to hire a private investigator to try to identify the members of the ratings board and interview various directors whose films had to be re-edited as a result of the board’s initial ratings. Then he submits a preliminary version of this very film to the board so he can at least have some insight into the secretive process.
It is certainly easy to understand why movie ratings sometimes seem inconsistent after seeing this movie. Eight or nine raters screen movies and discuss what rating should be given, and then vote. The vote is not binding however, as the chair, Joan Graves, apparently can intercede and change the rating. Feedback to studio movies gives explicit guidance on what should be cut to ensure the desired rating, while independent movies get no such guidance and are forced to cut in the dark. At least this is the conclusion one draws from the anecdotal evidence of directors who have been involved in both types of movie. It is clearly a broken system, and it is one that is essentially impossible to penetrate, or even describe, as this movie shows. This is in large part because of the near-monopoly of the handful of companies that control all aspects of movie production and distribution, a fact that I frankly found more frightening than ratings system (if one can call it a system) itself.
I can’t believe you focused solely on the details. The general feeling that I get is a sense of 1984, with a different aspect of oncle Sam controlling what the masses can see or not see. I think this movie is showing how biaised, fake and manipulated our democracy is. One more example of people and artists being denied the right to full information. And stop being satisfied with the fact that it is worse elsewhere. We are being manipulated and brainwasked, we know it and we don’t do anything about it even when people like Kirby is showing it to us.
I’m not satisfied that it’s worse elsewhere. I’m sure it probably is worse in many parts of the world, but my interest in hearing about rating systems in other countries in this case would have been for countries that do it better than the U.S. The movie makes reference to a large number of other ratings boards among which the U.S. is the only one with a secret membership. And they mention in passing that other countries tend to rate more for violence than for sex. I think this movie would have been more effective if it had followed up more on those issues.