The article I chose discusses just what exactly is the MPAA’s (Motion Picture Association of America) goal is with their rating system. Starting off this article is an occurrence involving Harvey Weinstein (a movie producer) and how he had director Quentin Tarantino pitch the movie to the board. Weinstein made this decision because he feels the board doesn’t like him, but they like Tarantino. The MPAA has been criticized for many years for the way they rate films. I can agree with some of these criticisms. One main one is that of sex being rated harsher than violence in films. This just doesn’t make sense to me. Of course in the article Joan Graves (chief of rating board) defends this claim by saying that graphic violence films are rated harshly and that type of violence is quite common. Where is the line drawn? Look at the Saw movies, people are getting mutilated on the screen, and the audience sees everything, still these films are rated R. Being worried about kids is what the board says their concerns is, but if kids have someone to buy them tickets to those types of movies, why even rate them at all? Another problem I have with the rating board, that’s mentioned in this article is the fact that the board members are kept secret from the public. Why are they kept a secret? Graves says it’s to protect them from angry filmmakers and audiences. Kirby Dick makes a great point in the article mentioning that many officials in the government and school systems are known why are these people so special? This article really made me think just what exactly is the purpose of the rating board.
I definitely think as a culture we have skewed ideas of what is harmful, especially concerning sex and violence. Why do you think that is?
ReplyDelete