Who can guess what drives the Motion Picture Association of America’s Classification and Ratings Administration board to rate a movie the way they do?

It’s not like the group has a strong, codified standard for each rating that movies must adhere to. They don’t. Their general rule of thumb of leaving filmmakers alone to make the movies they want has lead to numerous misunderstandings about filmmakers think will constitute a specific rating and what the ratings board actually rules. Oft times, their decisions appeared to have little relationship to the actual content of the films themselves. The year 2010 was no exception, filled as it was with several incidences that left observers scratching their collective heads. Here’s a the top five controversies coming out of the MPAA last year.

A Film Unfinished

Documentaries generally aren’t affected too much by whatever rating that they may receive as their audience and distribution is rather limited. But director Adam Yauch hoped that his documentary about an incomplete Nazi propaganda film A Film Unfinished would be used as a teaching aid in high schools around the country. However, that hope was dashed when the MPAA gave the film an R rating for “disturbing images of Holocaust atrocities including graphic nudity.” Yauch countered in a statement “This is too important of a historical document to ban from classrooms… I understand that the MPAA wants to protect children’s eyes from things that are too overwhelming, but they’ve really gone too far this time. It’s bullshit.” And while he might be right in calling the MPAA’s reasoning “bullshit,” it probably was not the smartest move to do so a week before going into an appeal hearing with them. The ratings board turned down Yauch’s appeal, even though he sited The Last Days, another Holocaust documentary that the board had only rated PG-13 but noted it had “disturbing images of Holocaust atrocities including graphic nudity.” I’m sure that the fact that Steven Spielberg was a producer on The Last Days had nothing to do with his film getting the lesser restrictive rating. Right?

The King’s SpeechWhile the ratings board doesn’t have too many hard and fast rules, but its most famous concerns the use of “F-bombs.” Drop one and your film can receive a rating no lower than PG-13. Drop more than one and you automatically receive an R-rating. And as director Tom Hooper found out, there is no exception for context or even if the multiple uses are confined to a profanity-free film. The scene in question comes in his film The King’s Speech, which details the relationship between England’s King George VI (Colin Firth) and speech therapist Lionel Logue (Geoffrey Rush) who helps him overcome an oft-times debilitating stammer. In one scene, Rush needs to help the Prince prepare for an important speech to the British people in the face of Nazi Germany’s nightly bombing raids. To do so, he has the Prince blast through a string of profanities at high speed, including a number off-bombs.” Despite an appeal and the fact that it was clustered in one (historically accurate) scene, the MPAA still gave the film an R rating. Fortunately, that hasn’t stopped it from being one the most highly acclaimed films of the year and generating some strong Academy Award buzz.

The Tillman Story

Most people know the story of Pat Tillman, the NFL player who enlisted in the Army following the attacks on 9/11 and who was subsequently killed in action in Afghanistan. What is perhaps lesser known is that Tillman was killed accidentally in an incident of “friendly fire,” not in the manner that the Pentagon informed his family and the media. The Tillman Story is a documentary that follows his family as they dig for and uncover the truth about the death of their loved one and records their outrage over the use of his and other dead soldiers’ deaths as public relations tools by the Pentagon and the Bush administration in order to drum up support for their war on terrorism. Despite a lack of explicit violence or sex, the MPAA tagged The Tillman Story with an R-rating for excessive language, language that is no harsher than what one can hear from most teenagers anyway. Harvey Weinstein, the head of the film’s distributor, The Weinstein Company, himself no stranger to appealing ratings, couldn’t get the board to budge with the argument that the film was important for young people to see. Now since the MPAA also serves as an industry lobbying organization, it undoubtedly has many ties to Washington politicians and bureaucrats. Was there some back channel pressure applied to keep the film from getting higher visibility or was the MPAA proactive and took it upon themselves to protect their Washington friends from further widespread embarrassment over the whole incident?

Bereavement

In addition to rating films and cozying up to Washington politicos, the MPAA also gets final authority over the content of advertising materials that the studios release. And as Kevin Smith, the producers of the Saw franchise and others over the years have discovered, you can get into hot water with the group if you don’t get their stamp of approval on anything you wish to release. But if you expect the MPAA’s rulings on advertising to have more of a logical consistency than how they’ve rated films, then you’re very much mistaken. Case in point, a proposed poster for the horror film Bereavement, which featured a young girl holding a knife. The MPAA nixed the poster citing its “depiction of a child holding a weapon.” Now this could seem a bit reasonable, except for the fact that this year also saw the release of the comic book adaptation Kick-Ass, which was also advertised in part with a poster of a young girl holding a weapon. A much bigger weapon, I might add. So why was one approved and the other not? Was the MPAA distracted by the shiny bright colors of the Kick-Ass poster? Who can say?

Blue Valentine

Perhaps the most puzzling, and certainly the most publicized, controversy coming out of the MPAA this year was the one over the rating of director Derek Cianfrance’s drama Blue Valentine. Those who had seen the movie at its Sundance premier were stunned when the ratings board handed down an NC-17 rating. Attention soon focused on a sequence where Ryan Gosling’s character performs o s on Michelle William’s character. Shot from the side at a slight distance, the scene featured no nudity and was as explicit as a similar scene in Darren Aronofski’s Black Swan, which only received an R rating. Ironically, the scene in Black Swan featured Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis, having the MPAA going against its traditional stance of rating a homosexual sex act harsher than its heterosexual counterpart. Perhaps it has something to do with Blue Valentine being distributed by indie house Weinstein Company while Black Swan is from Fox Searchlight, a subsidiary of MPAA sponsoring member Twentieth Century Fox. Williams offered her own thoughts on the matter, speculating that the realism of the scene versus the fantasy element of the Black Swan scene may have informed the decision.

While it is not surprising that Harvey Weinstein appealed the decision, more than a few eyebrows were raised that he was able to get the rating lowered to the less restrictive (no pun intended) R rating. This lead to the issuing of polar opposite statements from the MPAA and national, self-appointed nanny group the Parents Television Council. The MPAA stated that the appeal shows that their rating system works with filmmakers while the PTC stated that the MPAA’s system was broken because they, in the PTC’s eyes, backed down. Of course, the PTC also stated that they had never seen the film themselves, so take their opinion for what it’s worth.

The movie ratings system turned 40 this past weekend and to commemorate the event, Time magazine spoke with Dan Glickman, chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America, and Joan Graves, Chairman of the Classification and Ratings Administration. If you’ve ever followed any news about the ratings system over the last several years, then there is nothing new in this interview for you. Glickman and Graves continue to spout the same old tired talking points, platitudes and scripted responses that they continue to give when discussing the ratings system.

It is a shame that two years after Kirby Dick’s excellent documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated exposed the many flaws in the ratings system that nothing has been done to fix any of them. The system continues to be, on its best day, barely adequate.

It would be easy to point out the hypocrisies of a ratings system that routinely gives violent, gory fare like the latest installment of the Saw franchise an R rating while director Kevin Smith has to fight to keep his own latest film from receiving the Scarlet Letter of ratings, NC-17, for a comedy about sex with surprisingly little nudity. Is the ratings board telling us that gruesome violence is marginally better than discussions about two consenting adults bringing pleasure to themselves and each other? That’s kind of sick if you ask me.

And their position on the NC-17 rating is patently absurd. They know well enough that no filmmaker is going to deliberately shoot for an NC-17 rating as no studio would want to release such a film. Many theater chains won’t exhibit them and many newspapers won’t advertise them. It would be financial suicide. This is why major studios contractually obligate their directors to deliver the film in a shape for a specific rating, and no studio is going to ask for an NC-17 film. Of course, since all the major studios fund the MPAA, don’t expect one of their films to receive a rating that the studio wasn’t expecting to receive either, if you know what I mean. If the MPAA wants the stigma of the rating removed, than they will have to get out there and do it themselves. Just hoping filmmakers make more films with that rating is a cop out.

I could rant about the inadequacies of the ratings system all night, but its late and I’m tired.I’m tired of the nonsense Graves and Glickman continue to spout.Suffice it to say that unless the MPAA decides to stop giving lip service to wanting to help audiences determine if a film’s content is appropriate for them, they need to actually show that they’re trying to do something about it instead of waiting for Steven Spielberg to make NC-17 movies suddenly acceptable.

Needless to say, Kevin Smith has had some trouble with the MPAA over his upcoming comedy Zack And Miri Make A Porno. The summation of these troubles, he has now hilariously summed in the poster art for the movie which hits theaters at the end of October.

At his own blog, Smith states-

Our frustration in getting an MPAA approval on the American poster led to last-resort ideas about showcasing dopey, simple images instead of risque pics of our leads – which, in turn, led to what’s now the official American poster for the flick. I like it a bunch. Simple and kinda ballsy. Should be up in theaters this weekend.

I have to say, this is a great poster. It rightly sums up the absolute ridiculousness of the MPAA’s nanny attitude.

Chalk up another victory in what appears to be a never ending battle between filmmaker Kevin Smith and the folks over at the Motion Pictures Association of America.

Smith’s latest film, Zack And Miri Make A Porno, has been awarded an R rating, after Smith and his producer Scott Mosier appealed the ratings board’s original NC-17 classification this past weekend. An NC-17 rated film would have faced challenges in finding theaters willing to screen it and newspapers willing to accept advertising for it. If Smith had not been able to get the rating overturned, he would probably have been forced to make further cuts to the film to get it to a contractually obligated R rating.

This marks the third time that Smith has been able to successfully appeal a rating given to one of his movies. His debut feature Clerks, originally received an NC-17 for language, while his dramedy Jersey Girl, originally was rated R by the MPAA. In each case, Smith was able to get the rating moved down one notch to R and PG-13 respectively.

Via AP. 

Earlier this week we told you about the problems that Kevin Smith is having getting his new film Zack And Miri Make A Porno past the MPAA’s film rating board with anything less than an NC-17.

This weekend, Smith will take time out of his appearance schedule at the San Diego COmic Con to join producer Scott Mosier and go before the ratings board as part of the appeal process to get the film an R rating. This isn’t the first time that Smith has appealed a rating for one of his film, talking the board down from an NC-17 to an R for his debut film Clerks. It is unknown if there are any contractual obligations on Smith to deliver an R rated cut of the film to distributors the Weinstein Company or not.

Via Newsaskew. (Who credit Cinematical with finding the omission of Zack And Miri from the MPAA’s database even though we reported it hours before they did…)

Last month we told you about writer/director Kevin Smith and his problems with the MPAA and the rating of his new comedy Zack And Miri Make A Porno. Well, those troubles seem to be continuing, and we are not quite sure of what to make of them.

This past weekend, Newsaskew reported that according to the MPAA’s website, their inital NC-17 rating, for graphic sexuality, was currently pending appeal. However, a search of their site today reveals that Zack And Miri aren’t even in their database. Did Smith and company loose their appeal and have now decided to release the film unrated?

However, according to a press release that was posted on the Hollywood Reporter’s website, the film is still on track for release with an NC-17 rating. Is the press release right and the MPAA’s database somehow wrong or was the film pulled after the press release was sent out?

If Smith lost the appeal, it puts the Weinstein Company, who will be releasing the film, in a tough spot. Both unrated and NC-17 rated films have a tough time in the market as traditionally many theater chains won’t book them and many newspapers won’t carry advertising for them. Of course, Smith has several things in his favor, the first being the star drawing power of Seth Rogen in one of the two title roles. He also has a legion of fans who will show up to his films no matter how well or poorly they are advertised. Also, does newspaper advertising count as much, or at all, in the internet age? The print medium has been hemmoraging readers at a fantastic rate to online outlets these past few years. Combined with the growth of online movie ticket purchasing, it is conceivable that lack of print advertising won’t play much of a factor in a film’s box office take any more.

So far, Smith has not commented on what the final rating for Zack And Miri will be. We will continue to follow the story.

If you thought that a film with a title like Zack And Miri Make A Porno would sail through the MPAA’s rating process with no troubles, then you probably aren’t up on the long list of ridiculous and often contradictory decisions the board has made when it comes to assigning ratings to films.

Porno star Seth Rogen, now there’s a phrase I’m sure he’s proud to be a part of, has let slip to MTV Movies Blog that writer/director Kevin Smith’s latest film may be facing some rough waters in terms of getting an R rating from the board.

The MPAA is gunning for us, I think… It’s a really filthy movie. I hear they are having some problems getting an R rating from an NC-17 rating, which is never good.

Smith is no stranger to problems with the MPAA’s rating system. His first film Clerks initially received an NC-17 rating based simply on the number of F-bombs dropped in it. The rating was changed on appeal. More recently, Smith’s Clerks 2 featured a bachelor party scene with implied bestiality that reportedly passed the board’s review with no problems. The ratings board’s mindset on these matters is something that Rogen can’t fathom.

A guy f—ing a donkey, they ain’t got no problem with. But a man and a woman having sex they seem to have real issues with, for some weird reason. It’s insane. It’s completely insane… They [fight against] sex stuff. Isn’t that weird? It’s really crazy to me that Hostel is fine, with people gouging their eyes out and sh– like that. But you can’t show two people having sex — that’s too much.

Smith has already had one run-in with the MPAA over Zack And Miri, when he posted an internet-only teaser trailer for the film. Although the teaser contained no actual footage from the movie, he was asked to take it down by the MPAA as they had not approved it for release.

Smith has not commented directly on any further trouble he may be having with the film and the ratings board, though last night in a brief online Q & A he did mention that he has “been too busy dealing with the MPAA on other matters.”

As most people who have watched the MPAA’s decisions over the years, succinctly summed up in Kirby Dick’s documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated, know that consistency and common sense are two words that are not often associated with the MPAA or their film ratings process.

Zack And Miri Make A Porno will be released at the end of October.