The way that movies are rated is quite interesting, but I think that the way that the ratings are meant to be used is even more interesting. Here's the thing, I think that most of the people who pay any attention to the movie ratings (me included) (and excluding people outside of the US, because it is the Motion Picture Association of America) expect that the ratings are to give us an idea of what's contained in the movie (violence, language, etc.).
The ratings, though, are to inform movie-goers of who they should bring with them to the movie, not to tell what people can expect once they get to the movie.
A suggestion that I have to solve this is to make the ratings tell the contents of the movie. The filmmakers would still be able to choose what he or she puts in the movie, but they would be obligated to disclose the content of the movie, letting the people know what kind of violence is in the movie, or how much hard language is in it as well.
Movies are not simply rated too lightly all of the time. Sometimes they're even rated too heavily, simply because of one small word or kick that doesn't have anything to do with the movie many times. Many R-rated movies had a lot of historical foundation and are very educational movies, and because of gory reality they are rated R.
This is the biggest suggestion I can give for the MPAA, to include the content of the movie, and to rate it according to that. I think that would fix a lot of the frustration with movies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment