Tuesday, October 5, 2010

Tuesday

A bonus movie update in the next day or two, since this was a longish summary.

THIS FILM IS NOT YET RATED (2006)

I had heard about this documentary for a while and despite it being ancient history for a documentary (four years ago) it was available on Netflix Instant. It was rather disturbing. I remember not having a TV available to me for the first time in my life as I was subletting an apartment in Washington D.C. for a summer internship in 2002. It was also my first urban living experience, and my first experience having access to several movie theaters showcasing only independent films that, if you were lucky, might screen at a single theater in Des Moines or Oklahoma City and that’s only if a film with more mainstream buzz or a less regarded blockbuster filled up that theater slot. At that time, being in that City was the only way for me to see the rare art films that cover a realm of creative expression that has been proven over subsequent years to be SO beyond what even the most critically regarded mainstream movies can do for me. Living in Chicago began the phase II of complete immersion in cool substantial creative culture, with the added bonus of theater and oh so many indie rock shows at your doorstep. Now I’m in a continuous Phase III, as I have the resources and technology (via Netflix, Rhapsody, YouTube, and proximity to Madison, Chicago, AND Milwaukee) to see and hear so many things. Despite the efforts of the awesome video/DVD rental place that opened near the Drake campus when I was wrapping up my time there, I simply did not have access to everything I could possibly want to view. In short, I can never watch in a lifetime what is available to me now, but I can access it. That access is what really bothered me about this movie’s subject, but also gave me a more enhanced appreciation of what new forms of access mean for the future of films. This documentary covers the operations of a secretive ratings boards that, in private arbitration, determines the ratings for all motion pictures distributed in commercial theaters in the United States. The filmmaker goes about to explain why this board is so frustrating for filmmakers, because their standards for what determines PG-13, R, or NC-17 have no rhyme or reason for the most part. The few insights into their deliberations do reveal a more lenient attitude towards violence compared to depictions of sex, a higher tolerance for heterosexual behavior than homosexual activities, and a very conciliatory attitude towards larger studio films then independent films. Then to remove the veil of secrecy over this board, the director hires a private investigator to try and put some names on these faces, and also reveal the identities of the appeals board, an ever more secretive body that hears appeals from the ratings board decisions.

An NC-17 rating passed down by this board is pretty much a commercial death sentence, as many theater chains have a policy of not screening these movies whatsoever. With such high stakes on this mysterious board’s determination, you think there would be some form of accountability, some type of process or handbook where filmmakers can at least be aware of the risks of putting their complete vision on screen, regardless of vulgarity. But there isn’t and these people just do what they want and get a full-time job watching movies all day to boot.

If your passion about films, this is extremely upsetting, but if you follow politics more broadly, there is also that nagging feeling from viewing firsthand that a small group of people, unaccountable to the public, voters, elected officials, are decided what’s appropriate for you. It almost makes you completely unsympathetic to criticisms of video piracy. Of course, 99% of people sharing videos of new movies online just don’t feel like paying for a ticket to watch a movie in a theater. But if the complete body of cinematic work released in American has to be funneled through this board that has substantial indirect powers of how this movie would be distributed, then I would champion any way that imposing force can be taken out of the equation. Fortunately, I have my own patterns of film intake and access channels to the point where this ratings board can really only keep me waiting a few months before I can watch what I’m interested in. But if it’s still operating the same way as it did 5 years ago, then the new revolution of online filmmaking and non-traditional distribution of new movies can’t come sooner.

No comments: