This is one of the many reasons I'm glad I live in Canada...
Our rating systems (every province has a seperate ratings board) is not based on stupid, limiting occurances. Each movie is watched and given a rating based on the overall content. Sometimes the ratings vary province-to-province (the Ontario board has been known to be a tad harsher than other provinces at times) but at least it's not completely mind-boggling. They give you very clear reasons why each rating is given, and it makes sense.
But in the U.S., the MPAA ratings seem to treat language and nudity as considerably worse things than violence, and it doesn't seem to matter the context, either. I had heard this before, but it was reaffirmed by Zach Braff in his latest Garden State blog post that 1 use of a certain expletive is accepted, but 2 uses of that same expletive in a movie and it is given an automatic R rating (roughly equivalent to Manitoba's 18A... if you're under 17, you can only see the movie accompanied by an adult).
Now, for anyone who knows me, obviously I'm not a huge "fan" of swearing. I do my fair share, but make a conscious effort not to. I don't even like listening to music with blatant or unnecessary foul language. But when presenting a movie based on real life, sometimes it is called for. For instance, I watched The Shawshank Redemption with my parents when I was 13 or so, and they didn't mind all the foul language being presented on my young, impressionable self. They explained that while it wasn't good to use that language, it was accurately representing what language in prison would be. People wouldn't be saying "gosh darn". I think most young people in their teens can understand this concept. However, a movie where the "cool hero" blows the head off of a bunch of people, say a neat-o catch phrase, and wink at the camera can get a rating of PG-13 in the U.S.? Yet Garden State, which doesn't have any real violence or even sex, gets a Restricted? Absolutely ridiculous.
In other news, CanadaMovies.net / MovieContests.com is switching servers over the next couple days, and I will be OUT OF TOWN when it happens. This is both absolutely wonderful and potentially disastrous. It's wonderful because even if there are problems, minor or major, I will be away at a cabin and will not have to deal with them. But if the problems are large enough, it could make some movie studio peeps, along with our visitors, a tad angry. And that's never good. Regardless, it's gonna happen this way, and there's nothing that can be done about it now. Heh.
Well, I must get to finishing the transfer of everything over to the new server so that the transition is as smooth as possible.
Our rating systems (every province has a seperate ratings board) is not based on stupid, limiting occurances. Each movie is watched and given a rating based on the overall content. Sometimes the ratings vary province-to-province (the Ontario board has been known to be a tad harsher than other provinces at times) but at least it's not completely mind-boggling. They give you very clear reasons why each rating is given, and it makes sense.
But in the U.S., the MPAA ratings seem to treat language and nudity as considerably worse things than violence, and it doesn't seem to matter the context, either. I had heard this before, but it was reaffirmed by Zach Braff in his latest Garden State blog post that 1 use of a certain expletive is accepted, but 2 uses of that same expletive in a movie and it is given an automatic R rating (roughly equivalent to Manitoba's 18A... if you're under 17, you can only see the movie accompanied by an adult).
Now, for anyone who knows me, obviously I'm not a huge "fan" of swearing. I do my fair share, but make a conscious effort not to. I don't even like listening to music with blatant or unnecessary foul language. But when presenting a movie based on real life, sometimes it is called for. For instance, I watched The Shawshank Redemption with my parents when I was 13 or so, and they didn't mind all the foul language being presented on my young, impressionable self. They explained that while it wasn't good to use that language, it was accurately representing what language in prison would be. People wouldn't be saying "gosh darn". I think most young people in their teens can understand this concept. However, a movie where the "cool hero" blows the head off of a bunch of people, say a neat-o catch phrase, and wink at the camera can get a rating of PG-13 in the U.S.? Yet Garden State, which doesn't have any real violence or even sex, gets a Restricted? Absolutely ridiculous.
In other news, CanadaMovies.net / MovieContests.com is switching servers over the next couple days, and I will be OUT OF TOWN when it happens. This is both absolutely wonderful and potentially disastrous. It's wonderful because even if there are problems, minor or major, I will be away at a cabin and will not have to deal with them. But if the problems are large enough, it could make some movie studio peeps, along with our visitors, a tad angry. And that's never good. Regardless, it's gonna happen this way, and there's nothing that can be done about it now. Heh.
Well, I must get to finishing the transfer of everything over to the new server so that the transition is as smooth as possible.