This Film is Not Yet Rated

This Film is not Yet Rated Is a documentary about the rating system run by the Motion Picture Association of America. It is not in the style of cinéma vérité but instead has an expressed purpose of attacking the system in place and exposing inconsistencies and biases that exist in the way films get rated in the US.

The film gives a brief history of cinema censorship and talks about how the film industry has chosen to “self regulate” itself to avoid government censorship. The filmmaker hires a private detective to infiltrate the MPAA and find out the identities of the film raters, which are kept secret (the process of which is chronicled in the film). The film contains various interviews with directors and their experiences with the rating system. It goes on to surmise the characters of the film raters and suggests that they discriminate against films with homosexual content and treat sexual content more strictly than violence. Also it uses animated figures to paraphrase the filmmaker’s interaction with the MPAA, instead of using actual transcript.

The film is has a clear bias and makes little attempt to represent both sides of the argument. The founder of the MPAA is made out to be a devious liar, and his words are also hand picked in a way to make him reflect poorly, as opposed to interviewees who agreed with the filmmaker who got ample screen time and opportunity to explain their views. It tries to make the case that the raters do not represent the ideologies of everyday Americans, even though the MPAA claims they do. It also claims that the MPAA and the studio system are in cahoots and act in mutual benefit of each other, but offers no explanation how or why they benefit from each other.

While the film does expose inconsistencies and lies of the MPAA, it does not offer any alternative idea or seem to value any form of rating system. It offers very little viewpoint from people who have benefited from or used the rating system and makes it seem that few people take the rating system seriously. Which if this was true, NC 17 movies would not average millions less in revenue, and filmmakers wouldn’t be getting upset over the power wielded by the MPAA. Overall the film suffers from a lack of clarity in its purpose, and a lack of balance in its viewpoints, which seems to reduce the impact of the film by diminishing its ability to facilitate open-minded thought. However it also carries with it many valid ideas regarding the way America thinks about and reacts to the content in our films, and can be a valuable tool in gaining a better understanding of the way films are created and distributed in America.

Joe Steigerwald