Pissed-off. Frustrated. Betrayed.

These three words best describe how I felt after watching This Film Is Not Yet Rated. As a film lover, that’s saying a lot because very seldom do any of us leave a film and feel anything beyond “entertained”. Furthermore, all I did was watch a movie about the frustrations of getting an “R” rating for an edgy film instead of “NC-17”. It’s not like I actually tried to make an edgy film!

This Film Is Not Yet Rated is a documentary by Director Kirby Dick that explores and exposes the Motion Picture Association of America Ratings Board. The MPAA Ratings Board exists solely to determine which rating gets applied to films released in the U.S., and as Dick found out while trying to make this film, the board is one of the most secretive organizations in America - second only to the CIA, in fact. They are also one of the most powerful entities in the film industry.

Of course, they would like you to think they are simply supplying a service to the American public by giving parents criteria to help determine what their kids should and shouldn’t see. Dick’s documentary exposes just how much of a sham that is and does so in a way that’s informative, inflammatory and entertaining. The film starts with an interview where Kimberly Peirce, director of Boys Don’t Cry, relates her battle to get an R rating instead of NC-17. The importance of the R is that without it, she could kiss her marketing and advertising dollars goodbye, thus scuttling all the hard work she put into bringing a very moving and important story about intolerance to the screen. When she finally gets clarification about the offending bits in her initial cut, she is told that it is the action of the lead character (fully clothed) wiping her mouth after oral sex (which is not shown) that has caused the rating. This despite the fact that there is one graphic murder and multiple gory beatings shown throughout the film.

Peirce is just one of many directors who have faced frustrations like this, but she is one of the lucky ones. As Dick interviews other directors, he exposes some serious flaws in the system; for instance, the fact that many independent film makers get absolutely no feedback on why their film gets the NC-17, while major studio projects will get detailed lists of scenes to edit.

This is just one of the many outrageous things This Film Is Not Yet Rated brings to light. It raises a number of questions about the criteria the board uses and points out a ton of examples where things are weighted unjustly. Some of the other questions raised are:

• Does the board have a bias when showing sexual satisfaction in females as opposed to males?

• Does the board look differently upon violence than it does sex?

• Does the board look at gay relationships differently than straight?

• Should this process become a government controlled process?

Directors from Kevin Smith (whose non-violent and completely nudity free Clerks was “slapped” with an NC-17 that he successfully appealed) to John Waters (whose A Dirty Shame rocked the censors’ world) to American Psycho director Mary Harron relate their battles with the board. All of this is intermingled with animated clips, fast-paced history lessons on censorship in American film and clips that compare and contrast similar scenes that got completely different ratings.

The biggest draw to this documentary, though, is that Dick didn’t stop at just giving us an overview of the problems with the system. Dick decided he wanted to find out exactly who was on the ratings board and if the MPAA was telling the truth about the raters. The official line is that these people are parents of children between 5 – 17. Their identities remain anonymous to protect their privacy and relieve “pressure” they might feel about their job. Dick puts the pressure on, hiring a private investigator and exposing the identities of almost all the people on both the ratings board and the more sinisterly stacked appeals board. The results will piss you off while making you laugh at the same time.

This Film Is Not Yet Rated is a documentary that has fun with its subject matter while still exposing the facts. In that regard, it’s easily compared to Supersize Me, however Kirby Dick has taken a much bigger chance with his film. After all, he is essentially biting the hand that feeds him and for the snotty little rebellious punk in me, that gives it big time credibility. I don’t think I’ve laughed as hard at most fictional comedies as I did upon seeing Dick submit his film for a rating; the same film that exposes each of the raters identities. It is hilariously fun to witness the follow-up phone calls from the boards president and the attorney in the appeals process.  

See this film, please.

Presentation
The film looks great and is much more than a talking head festival, which is fantastic. I received a screener disc only so I don’t have any information on the audio. It sounds fine, though and you won’t find anything to complain about. As soon as the copy that will be available on shelves January 23 arrives at my door, I’ll update this section. 

Extras
The extras on this disc are all fantastic. First up, the commentary features Director Kirby Dick, Producer Eddie Schmidt, Film Critic Drew McWeeny and Private Investigator Becky Altringer. McWeeny does a great job of feeding questions to this group to keep the conversation lively and informative. This is one of the better commentaries I’ve heard.

Next up is a Q&A with Director Kirby Dick at the 2006 SXSW Film Festival. This is a very cool addition as many of the questions asked are ones I thought of immediately after watching the film. Dick comes across as very personable and seems to be having a great time talking about this subject and the making of the film.

Finally, there are deleted scenes included that shed further light on the MPAA board and their decision making process. All are good, but there are three on here that I think are must-sees. “The Funnymen of Censorship” is a very entertaining collection of interview clips that didn’t make the final cut. This included conversations with Kevin Smith and John Waters. Each of them is on-topic and they aren’t bloopers, they just continue to drive home the point that Dick’s edited film already makes. “Too Much Love And Basketball” is an interview with the director and editor of that film on their trials in getting a PG-13 rating. It brings up a question of whether there is a bias in rating sex scenes between African-Americans as opposed to white actors. “MPAA vs. New Technology” is a great collection of interview clips with Fred Von Lohmann, Attorney for Electronic Frontier Foundation, that addresses everything from piracy to emerging trends that may affect the role the MPAA Ratings Board plays in the future and what the board is doing to stop them.
 
The Bottom Line
Kirby Dick has made a movie that someday may actually lead to a change in the way movies are rated. He may have used tactics that some consider too invasive (exposing the board members’ names is the tip of the iceberg) but in my opinion, he deserves big praise. He shined a bright light on a very mysterious part of getting a film released in the U.S. As an American, it hit me hard that I’m living in a country that beats its chest in pride about its liberal freedom of speech laws while simultaneously praising a board that suppresses that freedom everyday. Where other documentaries weave intricate webs of conspiracy trying vainly to show the hypocrisy of shadowy government organizations, Dick found a real one sitting in his backyard and shared what he found with all of us. Please see this movie