I haven't seen it yet; I only found out about its existence while I was doing research on the history of the MPAA ratings system.
Somehow, I fail to be surprised. The current classification system is already a farce, particularly in the PG-13 category (have you noticed that very few films get straight-up PG ratings anymore?) because it's harder to market a film with an R or NC-17 rating, so the MPAA lets them slide with the PG-13. And so many movies get that rating these days it's become a joke.
Now I'm hearing rumors that they want to do away with NC-17, because so few movies get that rating (the last one was back in 2007, I believe) and because it's almost impossible to advertise such a movie in an ad market always at the whims of social conservatives. Which, in one of those supreme ironies of the business, was precisely what the NC-17 rating was created to avoid by replacing the used-and-abused X.
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the current ratings system is hopelessly fuhkakteh, as I used to hear a
( ... )
Comments 1
(The comment has been removed)
Somehow, I fail to be surprised. The current classification system is already a farce, particularly in the PG-13 category (have you noticed that very few films get straight-up PG ratings anymore?) because it's harder to market a film with an R or NC-17 rating, so the MPAA lets them slide with the PG-13. And so many movies get that rating these days it's become a joke.
Now I'm hearing rumors that they want to do away with NC-17, because so few movies get that rating (the last one was back in 2007, I believe) and because it's almost impossible to advertise such a movie in an ad market always at the whims of social conservatives. Which, in one of those supreme ironies of the business, was precisely what the NC-17 rating was created to avoid by replacing the used-and-abused X.
The more I think about it, the more convinced I am that the current ratings system is hopelessly fuhkakteh, as I used to hear a ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment