There's been a lot of interesting things going on between ever-controversial super-producer Harvey Weinstein and the Motion Picture Association Of America over the past year. After winning the fight against the MPAA's extremely controversial NC-17 rating of Blue Valentine and losing the fight against The King's Speech R-rating (eventually releasing an edited version of the film), Weinstein is challenging the anonymous rating board's suggestion that Bully, a documentary that follows the lives of five bullied teenager over a year of high school, be rated R for language.
At issue is that an R rating will likely prevent the film from being screened in schools and will prevent many teenagers who might be interested in seeing it from doing so without having to bring a parent along with them to the theater. At issue was the use of language in the film, presumably of the curse-word variety: understandably enough, considering that this is a film about bullying. The MPAA has some pretty arcane and specific rules regarding the use of curse words, e.g. you can say the word "fuck" in a PG-13 movie, but only once, and only if it's not used in a sexual context. Any more than that, and you're going to get that R, as Bully apparently did.
"As of today, The Weinstein Company is considering a leave of absence from the MPAA for the foreseeable future. We respect the MPAA and their process but feel this time it has just been a bridge too far."
Weinstein, never one to shy away from an impassioned statement or a moment that might gain a film some publicity, last week threatened to take a "leave of absence" from the MPAA in protest, which would presumably mean that he wouldn't submit films from his company to be rated by the MPAA, instead releasing them as "unrated." That's almost certainly just bravado on his part, as adherence to the rating system is required by many advertisers, such as newspapers, who will refuse to advertise unrated or NC-17 films, and pretty much all major theater chains, who likewise are unlikely to give theater space to NC-17 or unrated films.
That last point was hammered home today by the president of the National Association of Theater Owners, who sent a letter to Weinstein informing him that he would "have no choice but to encourage my theater owner members to treat unrated movies from The Weinstein Company in the same manner as they treat unrated movies from anyone else. In most cases, that means enforcement as though the movies were rated NC-17 – where no one under the age of 18 can be admitted even with accompanying parents or guardians.”
Weinstein certainly seems like he'll be on the losing side of this battle; he has already appealed the R-rating and had his appeal overturned, the MPAA being more concerned with adhering to its strict set of nonsensical laws that admitting that a film might have some purpose as to correcting a social ill, and that thus it might be worth allowing children to see it even if (gasp!) it contains language they hear every single fucking day. This is the same organization that rated Whale Rider, a heartbreakingly wonderful children's movie, a PG-13 film for a single scene of a young man smoking a cigarette. There are too many other instances of MPAA idiocy to recount here (check out This Film Is Not Yet Rated if you're interested in a little exposé).
In the meantime, Weinstein can spin his wheels, but ultimately he'll either accept the R-rating, release a bleeped-out version of the film (which would likely cripple any of its probably cringe-inducing scenes of actual bullying), or attempt to cut it down to a point where the MPAA would accept it. It's ridiculous, of course, that a film that might shed some light on a problem which causes many kids to accept suicide rather than face another day of school should be held to the same standards as Bucky Larson: Born To Be A Star, but when you're dealing with a rigid bureaucracy, you can't expend them to bend instantly. Unfortunately for most of us, the MPAA shows no signs of even wishing to allow for exceptions to its rigid rules, even in cases where the social good might be served.
In the meantime, a Michigan student has started a change.org petition targeted at the MPAA, asking that they allow the film to be rated PG-13. If Weinstein's appeal didn't make a difference, it's unlikely that her petition will do anything, but if you'd like to sign it, it already has over 100,000 signatures.
I really am getting sick of bureaucracy missing the point...
How did they get those images of the kids getting bullied? Hidden cameras? One would think that the bullies would behave properly around cameras.
@AuthenticM said:
That's what I was really curious about, too.
I side with Harvey Weinstein on this, I hope this gathers steam so the guys at the film board get shaken down by Harvey's mighty meat patty arms.
So damn stupid.
Ughhh. Movie adaptations of videogames hardly ever work...
I don't expect them to take on the social-political impact of each film, and cut down the rating accordingly, but I find it ridiculous that cursing causes anything more than a tame PG-13 for any film. If I didn't make it clear, I find the MPAA to be a silly institution that has obvious nonsensical biases, and I think that they need a retooling of their standards, but who is really surprised they didn't just say :"Ah, fuck it" to their standards to which they judge every other movie?
Also in a somewhat related note, I am eagerly anticipating the day the R rating becomes one in the same with the NC-17 rating because that is truly bullshit.
Hang on a sec. Did a film crew just watch on as kids were really bullied? Or were the scenes in the trailer 'dramatic reconstructions'?
@Godlyawesomeguy said:
I know right...if the whole point is to make it so parents have more control over what their kids are seeing, why the fuck is there a rating which takes away that control? I seriously hate the MPAA. If the UK, a place known for their bureaucracy, can sort out its rating system so that it's mostly uncontroversial...then surely the US can do it too.
I think it's time that the rating system in the US got an overhaul because it is just getting ridiculous these days with the King's Speech getting rated R for language and now this.
Just censor out the f-bombs if they care that much about making it PG-13. It might not be pretty, but it'd work.
Age barriers for strong language are utterly redundant. Swear words are almost literally inescapable for anyone of any age; it's one of the few downsides to this modern age of communication technology. If anything, movies that use a lot of cusses are probably better suited to a younger audience who still think it's awesome. But now I'm just sounding old.
Talking of utterly redundant, I notice the other NATO are weighing in on this. They do realise that they're largely incidental to this issue, and that most kids with their limited financial means (and most people of any financial background) will be watching this on Netflix or a similar service, either en masse in classrooms or in their own time at home? They can ignore unrated movies all they like, and we'll just continue to ignore them in turn.
The language of actual grade schools would be rated NC-17. The MPAA and all these parent's associations aren't protecting kids from anything they don't hear at school on a regular basis.
@WurmHat said:
i LOLed.
When Fahrenheit 9/11 came out a lot of theaters looked past the R rating and let people into the movie, I know my theater did. I can see this happening if this movie comes out with an R rating. It would be amazing if a movie chain stood up and said 'if someone under 17 wants to see this film we won't deny them' but I'm sure the higher ups in those companies would never stand for something important like this.
@AuthenticM: In the production notes on the website this question is asked....
Q. BULLY documents Alex being bullied on the school bus. Were you surprised that kids
would do this in full view of a movie camera?
Kids had been bullying Alex for so long, with such impunity, that they had no fear of
consequences. So while the bullying on camera was initially surprising, the reasons for it soon
made sense. We were also shooting on the Canon 5d Mark II, which looked like a still
photographic camera to the kids, so a lot of them were not necessarily aware that we were
actually shooting video. Because we spent so much time in the school, we eventually became
like the wallpaper and were able to witness what a very typical day looked like. That said, we
believe that the bullying was also much worse when the camera was not present.
I really liked This Film is Not Yet Rated except for the last fourth which went away from the interview/anecdotes format and turned into this weird, semi-stalkery attempt to actually see and interview an MPAA member. Needless to say: it goes nowhere, accomplishes nothing and comes off as PRETTY creepy.
I was bullied in school and feel the MPAA can go fuck themselves.
Man, just watching that trailer has made my brain flood me with memories of days past when I was bullied. I don't know if I could watch that whole movie.
@smi1ey said:
That game had a ratings issue as well. Rockstar was eventually able to get a Teen rating, so maybe this will work out as well.