Ever since Kirby Dick released his documentary This Film Is Not Yet Rated last year, it has sparked a lot of productive discussion and debate regarding the MPAA and the flaws with their current movie rating system in the U.S. As a direct result, they’ve already taken steps to improve some of their policies, but one big issue that keeps being brought up lately is the grey area between movies that are rated “R” and “NC-17″, with huge repercussions coming from falling into one category or the other despite their similarities.
Basically the problem is this: many parents feel that the MPAA is becoming too liberal with what they will allow in a Restricted film, particularly with the progressively gruesome horror movies hitting theatres lately. On the other hand, many movies that have just a little bit too much sexual content are being slapped with an NC-17, which means they will either have to be cut to make an “R”, or they will automatically be disqualified from being shown in most theatres, and will not be sold or rented at Blockbuster. Because of this, a lot of people are proposing a new rating of “A” for Adult: something that would encompass both the hard “R” movies with lots of gore and dismemberment, and also the risque NC-17 movies that contain sexual content without being pornography.
Personally I think this is probably a good idea. There seems to be a view that NC-17 films are no better than porn, and should not be supported by mainstream society. Perhaps giving this classification a new name will help remove the stigma attached to them. On the other hand, calling the new rating “A” for Adult is probably not good… if you ask me, that sounds even more like porn than NC-17! What do you think? Do you see a problem with the current rating system? Can a new rating help? Give us your thoughts here on Open Forum Friday.