What decides a movie rating?

December 16, 2008 6:32 AM

Help me deduce some of the clues for what movies get what movie ratings. (NSFW language inside.)

The MPAA's rating system is famously opaque in its decision-making, but I detect a few hints or benchmarks. It is clear -- to take swearing as an example -- that a PG-13 movie can have one-and-only-one use of the word "fuck" and apparently that only as an expletive, not as a verb. And it seems no compounds are allowed: the first three Die Hard movies, for example, were rated R and the fourth, PG-13 as it was, had the signature line punctuated with gunfire: "Yippee-ki-yay, motherf*blamblambam*"

Is there a conversion chart? Does one fuck have the same weight as three assholes or ten damns? And what about levels for violence and sexual images?

And note I bring up the MPAA purely because I suspect most AskMe readers are Americans (although I myself am not): I am happy to hear what the cutoffs are in other countries.

posted by ricochet biscuit to media & arts (12 comments total)

If you haven't seen This Film Is Not Yet Rated, you'll love it.
posted by meerkatty at 6:43 AM on December 16, 2008 [2 favorites has favorites]

This may not fully answer your question, but may provide some answers :

MPAA Rating System : http://www.mpaa.org/FlmRat_Ratings.asp

From the website :

"A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous."
posted by Brettus at 6:45 AM on December 16, 2008

Actually, the MPAA and the ratings board now provide more detail in their ratings as well. This detail can be seen here. For instance, here is the description of why Australia was rated PG-13: "Rated PG-13 for some violence, a scene of sensuality, and brief strong language."

There are also websites out there that track every instance of different types of content that are in films in order to help parents. Two that I know of are Kids-In-Mind and Screen It. So these sites will tell you exactly how many profanities are in a movie, what violent acts are present, what instances of sex and/or nudity, etc.
posted by bove at 7:05 AM on December 16, 2008

Seconding meerkatty's recommendation of "This Film Is Not Yet Rated". It's really a fascinating insight into how the rating system works (and how it doesn't).
posted by DWRoelands at 7:10 AM on December 16, 2008

In Britain, children under twelve can hear the word fuck four times if they're accompanied by an adult. Saying fuck five times however is shocking and renders a film unsuitable for those aged eleven and under.

Under sevens can hear the words damn, hell and crap and also see nudity if it's non-sexual, all of which would push a film from a G to a PG in America.

Oh and for a while in Britain, you could attack somebody in a PG movie with a ninja sword, but not with a set of nunchuks, so in the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles movie Michelangelo had no signature weapon and seemed pretty useless compared to the others.
posted by the latin mouse at 8:16 AM on December 16, 2008

I remember the furor that lead to the creation of the PG-13 rating -- I think it was way back when Raiders of the Lost Ark was in theaters, because on the one hand it didn't have quite enough language and violence issues to merit an R -- but on the other hand, you have Nazis' faces melting off. It was a really good reminder that sometimes there's a bit of a nuance between what the 12-year-olds can handle and what the 8-year-olds can.

I also remember that there was a HUGE fuss made over the movie when my parents wanted to see it, and were okay letting ME see it (I was twelve), but not my brother (he was only nine), because they figured I could handle it, but he couldn't. And my brother had a near-tantrum over this, and we got into this huge family argument with my brother insisting that it wasn't fair that I got to go but he didn't, and my parents saying he was too young, and then I'd try to keep the peace by offering to stay home but my parents stubbornly insisting that that wouldn't be fair to me, but then my brother would say it wasn't fair, and...etc. etc.

I can only imagine that that little scene was played out in a lot of other houses, prompting the creation of a new rating to give parents more ammo -- "sorry, this is PG-13, so they won't let you in because you're ten. But your big brother is 13."
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 8:44 AM on December 16, 2008

Nthing "This Film..." which is an awesome movie, and shows how arbitrary the process can be.

If you want something a little on the scholarly side, Ron Leone has done a lot of work (using content analysis) comparing different MPAA ratings after the fact. For example, he has documented the changes in the PG-13 rating, what will get a movie an NC-17 instead of an R, and ratings creep between PG-13 and R. [full articles behind pay wall, I'm afraid]
posted by DiscourseMarker at 8:57 AM on December 16, 2008

Thanks for the answers so far. For what it's worth, I have seen This Film...
posted by ricochet biscuit at 9:29 AM on December 16, 2008

As a case study, The American President has three fucks and is rated PG-13. Perhaps using it as an exclamation rather than a description of copulation matters.
posted by ALongDecember at 10:39 AM on December 16, 2008

"Remember what the MPAA says: horrific, deplorable violence is ok, just don't say any naughty words."

-- South Park: Bigger, Longer, and Uncut (Trey Parker, 1999)

The movie is realistic about sex, which is to say, franker and healthier than the smutty evasions forced on American movies by the R rating. We feel a shock of recognition: This is what real people do and how they do it, sexually, and the MPAA has perverted a generation of American movies into puerile masturbatory snickering.

-- Roger Ebert, review of Y Tu Mama Tambien

Because we have become so timid in regards to depicting and viewing human sexuality in any kind of mature way, it has manifested itself in other ways, usually in the form of comedy, innuendo, and representations suggesting just enough sex that is acceptable...Films that are daring, honest, and up-front with approach sexuality maturely are slapped with an NC-17 rating and are never seen, let alone produced and distributed by a major studio.

All quotes from Sex and violence as filtered by the MPAA.

Saving Private Ryan: Received an R-rating and a "history exemption" from the ratings board despite graphic war violence including dismembered bodies, disembowelments, exploded heads and close-ups of Nazi-on-Adam Goldberg homicide.

Boys Don't Cry: Threatened with an NC-17 for a lingering shot of a topless Chloe Sevigny experiencing an orgasm, but allowed to keep the climactic rape scene and gunshot to Brondon Teena's head.

40 Reasons to Wish the MPAA Ratings System an Unhappy 40th Birthday
posted by kirkaracha at 11:12 AM on December 16, 2008

It was Temple of Doom that served as the catalyst for PG-13.

> I remember the furor that lead to the creation of the PG-13 rating -- I think it was way back when Raiders of the Lost Ark was in theaters, because on the one hand it didn't have quite enough language and violence issues to merit an R -- but on the other hand, you have Nazis' faces melting off. It was a really good reminder that sometimes there's a bit of a nuance between what the 12-year-olds can handle and what the 8-year-olds can.
posted by Jeff Howard at 11:19 AM on December 16, 2008

I asked a similar question last March about the PG movie rating which you might find interesting.
posted by blueberry at 4:39 AM on December 17, 2008